Re: Future of online fora

On Thu, 3 Apr 2025 20:29:55 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

On 4/3/2025 3:18 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:

On Thu, 3 Apr 2025 13:13:01 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
 

On 4/3/2025 1:07 PM, AMuzi wrote:

 
Back to the issue, would you consider it appropriate for grammar school
age children or not?

>
Me? Yes, definitely, at least for the upper grades. With discussion, of
course.
>
I don't know how kids' books are chosen, what the criteria and the
priorities are. If teachers want to delve into social issues, it seems
like there are infinite choices; and of course, there are certainly
non-social issues kids should be exposed to. But I'd have no trouble
with this book being one of the candidates.

 
"Me? Yes, definitely, at least for the upper grades. With discussion,
of course."
 
Oh, yes, a little group thinking makes everything better (NOT!)

Some clarification:

I believe that when someone says, "lets discuss something," what they
mean is, "I want to change how you're thinking about it."

The fact that some people, me for instance, reject those kinds of
discussions really upsets you.

You get into "discussions" here on RBT but you never change anyone's
opinions. Some people pay you the courtesy of countering your
arguments, but I generally don't even bother to read them.

Beyond the entertainment I get from watching you bluster and fume to
no avail, you're posts have absolutely no value.

Oh Mr. Tricycle Rider! I made a couple posts earlier today that you
neglected to snark at! You're slipping!
>
Maybe your obsession with me faded for a bit?
>
...
>
No, that can't be it.
>
;-)

"Maybe your obsession with me faded for a bit?"

Apparently, your obsession with me has not faded at all..

--
"Yeah, I like it, I love it, I want some more of it."
-- Tim Mcgraw