Re: politics

On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 12:32:09 +0000, "Kerr-Mudd, John"
<admin@127.0.0.1> wrote:

On Mon, 09 Dec 2024 12:02:23 -0500
jillery <69jpil69@gmail.com> wrote:
>

On Mon, 09 Dec 2024 10:34:40 +0000, Martin Harran
<martinharran@gmail.com> wrote:
 

On Mon, 09 Dec 2024 02:23:51 +0000, *Hemidactylus*
<ecphoric@allspamis.invalid> wrote:
>

Martin Harran <martinharran@gmail.com> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Nov 2024 10:05:40 -0800, erik simpson
<eastside.erik@gmail.com> wrote:
 

On 11/17/24 9:25 AM, Martin Harran wrote:

On Sun, 17 Nov 2024 08:13:43 -0800, erik simpson
<eastside.erik@gmail.com> wrote:
 

I'd like to propose a moratorium on political posts, as they are
off-topic.  I see general agreement on the unsatisfactory state of
affairs here in the US, but for now there's little anybody can do about it.

 
You'd prefer it to be essentially a Ron O blog?
 
That's what it's pretty well been this last while :(
 

Ron's been standing clear of electoral politics.  In fact, if he's the
most prolific poster, good for him.

 
Sorry, I meant to reply to this but it slipped by me.
 
Just to be clear, I have no problem at all with Ron's posting on the
Dairy Flu - on the contrary, that is the sort of stuff that he excels
at and I find his contributions highly valuable even if focused mostly
on the USA as there will be an inevitable knock-on this side of the
Atlantic.
 
My point was that recently, he has really been the only poster here …
unless you want to consider JTEM as a useful poster!
 

Ron scares the shit out of me on a regular basis and for that I thank him.
>
I don’t know if we’ve been able to rebound from the welcome demise of GG.
>
I do miss more frequent input from Lawyer Daggett and Burkhard. I think
they had both used novaBBS as an alternative means.
>
Ron Dean has returned. That’s gotta be better than JTEM, right?

>
So has MarkE. Coincidence?
>
One way or another, hopefully they will generate a bit more activity
than has been here since the end of GG.

 
 
You conflate smoke with substance.  Both MarkE and RDean are likely to
provide the latest rounds of deja vu all over again, where they repost
the same old arguments without acknowledging the answers they were

>
You are vindicated.
>
Also Martin Harran is reviving some historical debate about how Galileo was treated.
>

given before.  I suppose that's better than mindless trolls from J***
enablers, but not by much.
 

Mindlessness is in the eye of the beholder.

Not really.  When baseless ad hominems are asserted, which have
nothing to do with the subject(s) under discussion, that qualifies as
mindlessness.

JTEM's "debating style" is quite off-putting. Looks like he has troubles and projects them on anyone responding.

At least as off-putting as its enablers... IMO.  Based on your
previous posts to me and about me, apparently your mileage varies.

At least David Dalton is out to improve the world, in his own curious way.
>
And I imagine I'm just seen as sniping from the sidelines.
Not much new to see here, move along.
>
US Electoral troubles are behind us; it's now all about the fallout (I hope not literally). </gloom>

I disagree, in that the same mindless reasoning about what qualifies
as evidence permeate both science deniers AND Trump supporters.  As
his cabinet nominees illustrate, the inmates have taken over the
asylum.

--
To know less than we don't know is the nature of most knowledge