1ef0b8aa   
   XPost: rec.arts.anime.misc   
   From: kumonryuu@hotmail.com   
      
   "selaboc"  wrote in message   
   news:74f4ca02-9933-4c0c-a0fa-2c420f7ba018@5g2000yqz.googlegroups.com...   
   > On Jun 29, 11:43 am, "Blade"  wrote:   
   >> "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)"  wrote in   
   >> messagenews:i0ctk9$lnr$1@news.eternal-september.org...   
   >>   
   >> > Blade wrote:   
   >>   
   >> >> I posted to ask Sea Wasp why he loudly advocated an argument while   
   >> >> simultaneously declaring he was not advocating the argument, since   
   >> >> that   
   >> >> seemed to me to be a quite peculiar thing to do.   
   >>   
   >> > While it doesn't seem peculiar to me at all to note that there are   
   >> > multiple reasonable positions to take.   
   >>   
   >> Sure, noting that would be nothing unusual, but that isn't what you   
   >> actually   
   >> did. What you did was say:   
   >>   
   >> "This is a reasonable stance to take, although it is not my opinion.   
   >>   
   >> (THREE PARAGRAPHS OF ARGUING FOR WHAT IS NOT MY OPINION)"   
   >>   
   >> It was the contrast between your declaration of it not being your opinion   
   >> and your immediately following impassioned defence of it that struck me   
   >> as   
   >> peculiar.   
   >   
   > Ever hear of the devil's advocate?   
      
   Much as I appreciate your association of piracy-apologists with the devil,   
   by claiming Sea Wasp was playing devil's advocate, you are therefore saying   
   he was advocating a position he did not agree with for the purpose of   
   fomenting argument. Which, uh, would bear a certain resemblance to the   
   behaviour of a troll.   
      
   >> I note with some amusement that noone has yet showed up to claim the   
   >> lonely,   
   >> orphaned argument. Well, it is getting a little long in the tooth for   
   >> adoption.   
   >   
   > Well, I note with plenty of amuesment that you have yet to actually   
   > provide any of those "numerous" objections you claim you have so it's   
   > even up on both sides.   
      
   Ignoring the fact that I've made those objections on multiple other debates   
   on the subject in this newsgroup...   
      
   ...precisely what or whom are the two sides which are now even? I'm guessing   
   one must be me. The other would be... Wasp? But that makes no sense, since   
   Wasp and I weren't arguing. You and Ansgar? But since your complaint is that   
   I have not provided those objections you very sincerely care about and wish   
   to read, it can hardly be counted "even" if I have yet to give you what you   
   want. I must confess you have me perplexed here, selaboc.   
      
   Oh, I get it! It's the argument itself! Nobody has actually claimed to   
   believe in it, so the poor argument wilts, defeated. But on the other hand,   
   I have not yet actually pointed out why the argument doesn't hold water, and   
   so it yet remains unbroken - abandoned, unloved, frail... but alive!   
      
   That's not very nice of you, selaboc. All that poor argument needed was   
   someone to love and cherish it and it could have risen against my icy   
   indifference. Taking "plenty of amusement" at its plight, the terrifying   
   evenness of being caught between rejection and acceptance, is just cruel.   
   You rail against me for not putting the poor thing out of its misery, but   
   the words that spring from my fingers could only deliver the last shove that   
   drops it into its icy grave. You, selaboc, YOU had the power to give it   
   LIFE, to give it vigour and longevity with your compassionate embrace, and   
   you withheld that. I withhold its death, but you withhold its life. I think   
   I know which of us is truly the evil one here.   
      
   -   
   Blade   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)