From: nicholasiii@gmail.com
On Thursday, April 30, 2015 at 7:59:11 PM UTC-4, soupdragon wrote:
> Nicholas Benjamin wrote in
> news:16e1637f-7000-4e83-a528-61fc1afd3db6@googlegroups.com:
>
> > On Wednesday, April 29, 2015 at 8:00:38 PM UTC-4, Charles Ellson
> > wrote:
> >> On Wed, 29 Apr 2015 23:07:47 +0000 (UTC), Louis Epstein
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >In alt.talk.royalty soupdragon wrote:
> >> >> Louis Epstein wrote in
> >> >> news:mhpn2l$3gf$1@reader1.panix.com:
> >> >>
> >> >>> In alt.talk.royalty soupdragon wrote:
> >> >>>> Louis Epstein wrote in news:mhc0ie$la2$1
> >> >>>> @reader1.panix.com:
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> So why cross post it to scs, where their 'relevance' is no
> >> >>>>>>>> more than any other Scot killed in the wars? What, in
> >> >>>>>>>> particular, merits their 'adoration' by you over any other
> >> >>>>>>>> Scot who also die
> > d
> >> >>>>>>>> but you fail to salute?
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>> I post it to the soc.culture groups of the nationalities of
> >> >>>>>>> all the men listed.It represent the intersection of the
> >> >>>>>>> groups to which it is cross-posted.
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> You didn't answer the question. Let me repeat it for you:
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> What, in particular, merits their 'adoration' by you over any
> >> >>>>>> othe
> > r
> >> >>>>>> Scot who also died but you fail to salute?
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> I did answer the question.They are the Scots relevant to a.t.r,
> >> >>>>> from which this is cross-posted.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> No you didn't. You answered an entirely different question. I
> >> >>>> didn't ask you why it was relevant to a.t.r. Try again.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> If they didn't represent the intersection of relevance to both
> >> >>> s.c.s and a.t.r I wouldn't be cross-posting to the two groups.
> >> >>
> >> >> Explain the relevance to s.c.s.
> >> >
> >> >Already done.
> >> >Do you have problems realizing that people relevant to a.t.r
> >> >can also be relevant to s.c.s?
> >> >
> >> Do you have a problem realising you're not welcome in s.c.s ?
> >
> > That's a remarkably dumb thing to say on a post that's crossposted to
> > groups where he is welcome.
>
> Given that he's the one who initiated the crosspost to a Scottish
> culture group and caused the offence in the first place (and repeatedly
> does so each year despite requests for him to stop) perhaps you should
> direct your ire at Louis.
>
>
> > It's even dumber given the activity level on this list. Today there
> > have been posts on two issues: this, and one idiot going on about how
> > he won't do porn. Prior to that all activity has been
> > non-Scots-related commentary by the no-porn guy and a bunch of stuff
> > in Spanish that is apparently vaguely related to religion. The last
> > message that was on-topic prior to this thread was posted on the 12th,
> > and was a call for all the humans still on the list to go to Facebook.
>
> Firstly, this is not a list, it is a Usenet news group called
> soc.culture.scottish. Secondly activity level is irrelevant. Besides
> we like it quiet. Thirdly, you are not the one who decides what is
> on-topic for the group. The group does that through its charter, FAQ
> and custom and practice
>
> > Now if you wanted to use this as a springboard to talk about the
> > Nobility's role in modern Scotland, or criticize them, or even demand
> > a Scots-only-list,
>
> Nothing to do with a Scots-only group. This group is for those
> interested in Scottish culture, irrespective of nationality. Scotland
> has a long military history that is held in high esteem by its people
> including the sacrifice made by all who died in the wars. This guy
> doesn't even read the group yet insists on crossposting to it every
> Armastice Day a post that suggests the only Scots who died in war that
> matter and are worth saluting are a few of the priveledged class and
> the rest of the Scottish war dead don't even merit a mention. Which
> is extremely offensive to the vast majority of Scottish people.
>
> >Demanding the only guy on
> > this list whose actually talking about shit that is even vaguely
> > related to Scottish culture shut the fuck up, by cross-posting to
> > numerous groups where people who like are gonna read it, OTOH, is
> > dumber then paste.
>
> He's the one who initiated the crosspost. Take it up with him. But just
> to putting Scottish culture into context, Robert Burns is the national
> poet and to quote him - The rank is but a guinea stamp, the man's the
> man for a that. Anyone interested in the nobility know where to find
> it. It doesn't need to be, and shouldn't be crossposted to group where
> he already knows from previous experience, is unwelcome and causes
> offence.
How terrible. A person interested in the history of a demographic group
bothers to remember which ones of those people died in the war. This does not
imply that everyone else who died is an evil person who is not worthy of
memory, and therefore
complaining about it is disrespecting the sacrifice of all war dead.
Just because you don't like people doesn't mean they magically stop being
Scots, and their sacrifices stop being worthy of being remembered.
It's fucking 2015. Usenet Charters have been obsolete for more then a decade,
which is probably why that it took you a half-dozen stupid, small-minded, and
cruel posts to bother quoting one. You are a troll sir, of the worst kind.
Your insistence on
ending all discussion on this list vaguely related to Scotland is the reason
the only thing that goes on on this list is flame wars. You have set out to
destroy that which you claim to be defending, and you have succeeded
magnificently.
Congratulations.
Nick
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
