On Jul 10, 4:55 pm, "Dutch" wrote:
"Rupert" wrote in message

ups.com...

On Jul 10, 12:59 pm, "Dutch" wrote:
"Rupert" wrote

It's your job to state the mechanism whereby my behaviour causes
animal deaths. You've utterly failed to meet this obligation. I've
generously been helping you out by suggesting possible mechanisms.

Listen to how self-serving and condescending you sound, referring to
yourself as "generous".

You claim not to read Rick's posts, in which case you are hardly in a
position to comment.

I was reading to see what you said, not rick.


If you don't know the context you're not competent to comment on the
matter.

I am being extraordinarily reasonable and patient
in engaging with him. Calling me condescending in the context of
Rick's torrent of mindless abuse is utterly ludicrous.

His torrents of mindless abuse are not the issue, I accused you earlier of
being condescending and you gave me an example.


The context is relevant. I would have spoken differently if he had not
been being so extraordinarily obnoxious.

All this stuff about me being condescending is really tiresome
nonsense. You are a lot more condescending than me. You say you're
just analyzing what you see, well, so am I. None of you are in
anything like a position to complain about any aspect of my behaviour.

Then you squeal like an infant about verbal abuse.

No, I don't. I simply point out that the behaviour of all the antis
here, including yours, utterly flouts all civilized standards of
decency, rationality, or justice.

You didn't "simply point it out", you announced that you're going to
withdraw from the debate if we don't start acting according to your rules.

Yes, sometimes I make a decision not to bother responding to something
someone has said.

Incidentally you have threatened that about a dozen times and never followed
through on it.

I do follow through on it in the sense that I only engage with people
to the extent that I feel inclined to.

The point is that you don't like the rough language, I don't
mind it at all, at least it's direct.

There's nothing wrong with a bit of rough language every now and then,
but you people are constantly expressing a level of scorn and disdain
about every aspect of a person and everything he says which is totally
out of touch with reality. There's no rational basis for it, it's just
because they're vegan. No sensible person could seriously maintain
that all the derogatory opinions you people express are reasonable.

I don't like the air of superiority
you try to project, I find that offensive.


Why? I think I'm a lot better at maths than you, do you find that
offensive? Why would you? It's an obvious fact, there's no reasonable
doubt about it, and there's no reason why you should feel bad about
it, I'm sure you're good at lots of other things and it's partly due
to certain decisions you've made about what to do with your time. And
I also think I've studied moral philosophy a bit more deeply than you
and understand some aspects of it a bit better. You think I'm wrong,
well, I might be, but what of it? Why is it offensive? And these views
of mine wouldn't even come up if you people weren't constantly trying
to denigrate my intellectual abilities. No-one I interact with outside
this forum finds me offensive. The idea that any of you have grounds
to be offended by me in the context of the behaviour I put up with
from each and every one of you is utterly absurd.

Contrary to what you say my alleged "air of superiority" is not the
cause of the treatment I receive here. The cause is the position I
take. You all think that if someone takes a position like mine that
entitles you to abuse them. I think your grounds for this view are
incredibly weak, hence I find your behaviour offensive.

You earn every bit of verbal abuse you get, and then some.

On what basis can you judge that I earn Rick's torrent of mindless
abuse, if you don't read his posts?

I've read enough of them over the years. If you read his posts you should
know that his approach doesn't change no matter who he talks to, so to take
it personally when he calls you "killer" and "hypocrite" is pretty silly.


I'm not taking it personally. But my response to him was perfectly
reasonable in the context. The idea of finding fault with me for being
"condescending" with him is absurd.

I don't merit any abuse. I don't abuse you, and you do a lot more to
earn abuse than me.

You beg for it. Acting haughty and superior on usenet is a guarantee that
you will be verbally abused.


I don't act "haughty and superior". The behaviour of mine which you
think is "haughty and superior" is not the cause of the treatment I
receive here, it started from day one and it's because I'm vegan. You
think this behaviour is no big deal, fine. But your attempt to
rationalize that I somehow "deserve" it is absurd.

Anyone who endorses the kind of behaviour that the antis engage in
here is not fit to be a member of a civilized community.

See, I don't agree. I find rought language refreshingly honest and direct. I
find evasion, condescension. sophistry, self-righteousness, those kinds of
attitudes offensive.


No evasion, sophistry, or self-righteousness. A lot less condescension
than you.

I'm afraid you're not going to convince me that any reasonable person
would view my behaviour here as somehow being more offensive than what
I put up with. I think the idea is a joke.

You sponsor animal deaths by using a computer, because a computer uses
hydro
and hydro production causes animal deaths.

You evidently have not been listening. My electricity is produced by
solar panels.

Maybe, sounds fishy, but even if it is, the argument still holds for the
vast majority of people for whom you presume to speak, they don't all live
off solar panels. It also applies to the rest of your consumption as I said
below.


We'll talk about that later. Rick set himself the task of showing that
my usenet usage kills animals. He failed.





If your use of a computer is not
directly related to your survival then you are causing unecessary animal
deaths. Does that indictment sound familar? This same principle applies
to
every part of your life where you consume anything more than you require
to
survive. Even if you consider those few activities which truly *are*
necessary for your survival, you still could not do them if those deaths
were humans. That's how different your real lifestyle is compared to the
pie-in-the-sky ideas you spout.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -