>
>Have you had your daily dose of RF yet? I had mine already while
>driving to work.
>K5PRO
// Later. Brunch comes before activity on the 40m Combat Zone.
cheers, John
>
>>In my limited experiences, the political element - as well as the likely
>>outcome - can pretty much be evaluated by observing the ad hominem
>>content on each side of the fence. When the ad hominem content is
>>roughly equal from both sides, odds are that the argument is a stalemate.
>> However, it's a bit more complicated than that since there are several
>>grades of ad hominems. Category-1 involves rudimentary insults.?
>>Category-2 involves profanity and/or vulgarities. Category-3 is
>>allegations of a covert, non-spousal, coital union. Category-4 is the
>>plural form of Category-3. Category-5 is definitely not suitable for
>>discussion on a group where minors may be present. Category-6 is
>>inappropriate for discussions outside of the "Church" of Scientology
>>Newsgroup. This rating system facilitates scoring a debate since the
>>number of points is equal to the category number. For example, one
>>"idiot" and one "stupid" ad hominem is equal to 2-points. One "stupid
>>bastard" is worth 3-points, except on Sundays where it's worth 3.5
>>points.???
>>
>>cheers, Mike
>>
>>- R. L. Measures, 805.386.3734,AG6K, www.vcnet.com/measures.
>>end
- R. L. Measures, 805.386.3734,AG6K, www.vcnet.com/measures.
end
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/amps
Submissions: amps@contesting.com
Administrative requests: amps-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-amps@contesting.com
|