From: michaelg@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Michael Greenwald)
Subject: Please Stop.
Organization: CS Department, Stanford University, California, USA
Date:  6 Apr 92 16:13:53 GMT

The style and content of the arguments here are getting out of hand.

I don't mean to pick on Phil Hill, and I don't mean to defend Scott
Tai (that is, some people here seem to believe that all beliefs are
binary: either you are a Mensan or a Mensa-Basher.  So please don't
take this post as a blanket endorsement of all Scott's positions, nor
as a blanket condemnation of Phil Hill's.)  I'm picking one trivial
point which is no worse than all the others that I've seen, and no
more significant.  It just happens to be the proverbial straw.  

It is typical in form, if not, necessarily, in content:

phil%miracle@merk.com (Phil Hill) writes:

>tai@ailab.ncsu.edu (Scott Tai) writes:
>>hellmond@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Peter H. Hellmonds) writes:
>>
>>> written by someone who is no member of mensa and can therefore give very
>>> little insight into what's really going on.
>>
>>By keeping up with this newsgroup since its inception, I tend to disagree.
>>If the posters to this group are representative of MENSA as a whole, than
>>I have undoubtedly gained some insight into this organization.

>Mr. Tai,  This is a CLEAR CUT case of you quoteing someone out of context.
>This is of course your own way to dedend your own stupidity here.  I'll post
>the whole thread here:

> [deleted]

>Or paraphrased for those of you who can't decypher nested threads:

>Monty:  Is this newsgroup typical of Mensa?
>Tai:    Sadly enough, it is.
>Peter:  Mr. Tai is not a member of Mensa can't answer Monty's question.
>Tai:    I know what Mensa is like because I read this newsgroup.

>Mr. Tai, You have just scored a perfect ten on the BULLSHIT meter.

>I want to see you worm your way out of this one!

"I know what Mensa is like because I read this newsgroup" 

does not seem to be a reasonable translation of 

">>>If<<< the posters to this group are representative of MENSA as a
whole, >>>than<<< I have undoubtedly gained some insight into this
organization."

I have emphasized "If" and "than" [sic].  Many people have used your
interpretation of Scott's words to construct a straw man they then
proceed to knock down.

Come on.  The second clause of Scott Tai's statement might be false,
(although, to nitpick, even if "the posters to this group are not
representative of Mensa as a whole" it is possible that "[Scott] has
gained some insight into [Mensa]", although the mechanism implied by
his statement would not be the agent of his "gaining insight"), but
here you are not arguing, you are just picking a fight.

Maybe Scott started it, I don't know (read: "I don't care").  

Other than by a liberal use of kill files, I can't legislate what you
post [again, not to be taken personally by Phil and Scott - this just
seems to be a general trend among several posters on this group], but
it seems like the barroom rule should apply here.  If you aren't going
to respond in a "civilized" way, (i.e. argument, rather than
repetitive baiting), then maybe you should "step outside" (and "come
back in friends"? to complete the cliche).

There are no bouncers here, other than your conscience.  If I'm a
minority opinion on this, then my post is way out of line, and I
apologize.  Again, I don't mean to single out Phil Hill or Scott Tai.  


Xref: sparky rec.org.mensa:3004 alt.atheism:8276