Re: To conlang or to flame, that's the question.
|From:||Tom Wier <artabanos@...>|
|Date:||Wednesday, March 24, 1999, 23:54|
Sally Caves wrote:
> Bryan Maloney wrote:
> > > And if you say you weren't putting down someone who attacked it, you're a
> > > liar, because "liar" is an insult.
> > Never claimed not to have done so--it got your attention, didn't it?
> Looks like we've got somebody here more interested in flaming than
> conlanging on this list. Some people get other people's attention with
> the inventiveness of their art forms. Flaming usually comes down to
> that... a bid for attention where other attempts have failed. Settle
> down boys.
I totally agree. One of the reasons why I value this list so much is
the almost complete absence, usually, of flame wars like this. Moreover,
though, I feel that anyone who insists on nitpicking everyone's faults
should hold themselves to just as high a standard (for no one is perfect,
intellectually or otherwise), and should not be at all disturbed if people
respond in kind. This is, of course, what we *don't* want, so let's
stop it here.
Tom Wier <artabanos@...>
ICQ#: 4315704 AIM: Deuterotom
"Cogito ergo sum, sed credo ergo ero."