My Photo

June 2018

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30

BlogStats


« California Federalized (23may2009 update) | Main | Debt Monetization – How Nice »

23 May 2009

Comments

jeff pelline

"Dr." Rebane,
It's the Sierra, not the "Sierras."
Pretty simple stuff.

George Rebane

Enough is enough Jeff. Until you recall and put in practice what you learned at the knee of Mama Pelline, I am pulling your posting privileges.

Random RR Reader

Jeff Pee line - get a life!

George, thanks for the "state of the county" update.

Steve Enos

George... you pulled Jeff Pelline's "posting privileges"? So much for allowing free speech and the principals of the "Bastiat Triangle Alliance".

George... how do you feel about un-named posters and their comments? For years Russ has declaired that un-named posters have no value and should be ignored. How do you feel about un-named posters that hide behind some bush?

George Rebane

Steve, thank you for visiting RR!

I pulled the plug on Jeff because his thrust is always to deliver an ad hominid attack. The small nod that he sometimes gives to the issue, he does not trust to stand on its own. Instead he must bolster it, not with reason, but with denigrating the writer. This from the student newspaper of the University of New Hampshire explains –

Instead of confronting opposition with reason, and attempts at understanding their essential, common humanity, one classifies the adversary with a pejorative term, which justifies the complete lack of respect for any opposing views. It excuses one from having to think about anything uncomfortable if one decides ahead of time that another person's experience and resulting viewpoint are somehow less worthy than one's own -- elitism on a small scale.

Jeff is welcome to attack/counter my views to his heart’s content so that it contributes to illuminating the subject argument. But after two years of patience and many reader emails about Jeff …, among my many weaknesses, I confess that I am also not Job.

Re anonymous postings, they are a long standing American tradition, pre-dating the country itself – we all have read much from people who only give their nom de plume. Such postings serve a useful function, especially if the writer is afraid that the response will be ad hominid, or that he does not want to be publicly connected with the introduced notion. But I agree with Russ that to deliver ad hominid attacks from the cover of anonymity does not put you on the top rung of personal integrity.

Ultimately, I want Ruminations to serve as a forum for ideas, both new and in contention, and not as a mud pit for contending personalities. I stand and fall by my written word, which is there for all to see – cite it, and take it to task. Those who know me, know that every tenet of my belief system is open for debate, and can therefore fall to superior reason. No one has ever heard me declare, “There is nothing you can say that will make me change my mind on … “, for, after all, there might be. Since I am imperfect, my beliefs have always been a ‘work in progress’. In the moment, I do the best I can with what I’ve got.

Steve, I’m not sure of your reference to which principle of the Bastiat Triangle in this regard, but I hope that I’ve cleared up the matter. Else let me know. Thank you again.

DaveC

I am posting this on the comment pages of JP’s Blog, RS’s NC Media Watch and GR’s Rebane’s Ruminations.

The bantering between these three bloggers is getting old. It’s getting to the point I no longer want to read reader comments about a particular subject without having to wade through spiteful arguments. Some times the comments remind me of some Union or SF Gate comments where two or three commentators take on personal wars.

D. Cranfield

George Rebane

I agree with the DaveC’s sentiments, but was a bit chagrined that his broad brush included me. In a private email exchange I asked Dave the basis for his including me. He was only able to cite the above response to JeffP as my contribution to the “spiteful arguments”. The casual reader then concludes that I have participated in some semblance of a symmetrical exchange over the past months, which I have not. My position on ad hominid attacks is made clear in the above response to Steve Enos. Yes, let’s stay on topic, and stop pointing out whose feathers are more frayed – none of us are angels.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad