Re: intentionally distorting arguments

[Ludwik Kowalski <KowalskiL@MAIL.MONTCLAIR.EDU>]

I would be happy to be an impartial observer if I followed
the debate very carefully. Most of us would be probably too
busy to serve on a jury. Especially now that another school
year is about to begin. In my opinion phys-L is not an appropriate
place for extensive debates among experts. On the other hand,
watching the debate, even superficially, was interesting and
informative. But I would delete many messages without
reading if it were not the summer.

I do not know what else to say. Perhaps somebody who did
follow the debate very carefully, and who can be objective,
will summarize it for us and tell us if the accusation is justified.
It is our list and we do not spoil it. Somebody must be right
and somebody must be wrong but who am I to decide?

Ludwik Kowalski

William Beaty wrote:

> .... Is all this an innocent mistake on John's part?  If you believe so,
> then
> we can go back into the phys-L archives and I can show you quite a number
> of other such "mistakes."  When it is a repeated event, it no longer
> becomes so "innocent."  In addition, it is a common strategy used on the
> newsgroups, and its presence is quite obvious to those who've had to deal
> with it in the past.  This sort of "innocent mistake" is used all the time
> in newsgroup battles.  When its victims complain, the perpetrator can say
> "oh, I just made an innocent mistake that even you could make."
>
> Phys-L is NOT the newsgroups.  This sort of "debating tactic" is abhorrant
> when it crops up in a discussion of science.  Science is not about keeping
> our opponents confused and off-balance, and preventing them from clearly
> seeing the flaws in our arguments.  Science is about getting to the bottom
> of things.  John Denker's behavior shows that this is not his goal.