=
×

Julian Cope presents Head Heritage

Head To Head
Log In
Register
U-Know! Forum »
Merrick....
Log In to post a reply
79 messages
Topic View: Flat | Threaded
Merrick
Merrick
2148 posts

Re: Merrick....
Nov 06, 2005, 12:15
"It is a fair assumption, and one that is more than likely the case. I agree with that. I really do"

Why the sudden change of heart?

I find it curious that you can think the assumption is fair when, despite repeated explanation, you said it wasn't; it is 'baseless', made 'for no good reason' and indeed 'you can't just assume things'.

I wonder why my previous explanations did not change your mind, yet there's a sudden epiphany once Holy's been on.

"what I don't agree with is putting it in an article without being 100% sure."

Are you really saying that assumptions, likelihoods and probabilities have no place in journalism, even when they are declared as such and the reasons and evidence given?

"blown out of all proportion (thanks Holy)"

Less Holy, more the guy who now accepts what he repeatedly denied despite the reasoning, and perhaps also the guy who accused people of saying things they didn't say. Wait a minute folks, it's the same guy!

"felt the need to take you to task over the tone of it."

Then you did a poor job of it. Beyond the use of the word 'sneery' you didn't challenge the tone of it at all.

The only things you challenged were one thing that I didn't actually say, and the validity of using an assumption based on strong evidence but not fully verified.

"I'll continue to read you, and, if you don't mind, question you on things I don't like. I hope next time it remains a bit more civil (once again hooray for Holy)"

As i said, I presume I have more to learn on anything I write about, so I relish the questions my writing raises, provided the discussion is done intelligently. That means not using insults (which we've done well on with this, by and large) and responding to counterpoints rather than ignoring them and restating the initial point repeatedly (which is pretty much all you've done in this).

The repetition encourages responses in an exasperated tone that would inevitably make things heated. As such, and more importantly so we can make progress towards clearer ideas, it's to be avoided. Holy came in after that threshold had been crossed and as such isn't really to blame.
In reply to:
Re: Merrick.... (hongnam)		 Replies:
Re: Merrick.... (hongnam)
Topic Outline:
U-Know! Forum Index