From: mcspinks@unix.amherst.edu (Snarfblat)
Subject: Re: How very lame.
Organization: Amherst College
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 07:00:11 GMT

Titus,
I won't bother to quote your whole message and degrade it line by line. I don't
feel that that would further my argument. What I will do is turn your own words
against you and watch you try to dig your way out. Or maybe you will stop 
posting here. 
Anyway, you told me to unsubscribe to this newsgroup because I didn't like it.
You told me to turn off Full House because I don't like it. You told me that
the youth of today will be our tomorrow. On this last point I agree with you. I
ask you, do you think that the best way to deal with a problem is to ignore it?
I don't want to see tomorrow's leaders rotting their brains watching Full 
House. 
I said earlier that if 15 year olds are on the net, they must be at
least semi-intelligent. These people hold the best hope for our future. I 
don't want my generation to become a bunch of apathetic retrosapient couch
potatoes who are too lazy to think and will instead let others rule their 
lives. (yes, potato is spelled with an e in the plural. Don't compare me to 
Dan Quayle)  
I went to a public high school and I saw mindlessness in action. People would
spend the whole week planning what to do on the weekend. Watching Full House
is fine if it can be backed up. Working hard for a whole day and unwinding by
watching a mindless show is fine. Waiting anxiously for it to come on and
planning your life around your TV viewing is not healthy for the mind, in my 
opinion.
So, Titus, do you think young people should avoid thinking and solve problems 
by ignoring them? Do you advocate picking out every negative detail of an 
argument without presenting a better one? You seem to have the future of the
country as your interest, but it seems to me that you just want to sound good
by attacking my ideas. It must be the cool thing to do, if there are 18 posts
on it, right?  I don't think you would have had the courage to stand up against
my post if the 18 messages had been praising it strongly instead of ripping
apart my argument. 
Why did you attack me? It seems that your only point is to prove that I am not
smart. One can only assume you think you are smarter than I am. Your post
consists of many unfounded negative comments regarding my character: "Get a
life", "I wonder who the pathetic moron is", "Why don't you act like a grown 
up." Stop focusing on me and focus on my ideas. Would you vote for a
political candidate based solely on character and charisma? I should hope not,
considering your apparent concern for the future of our country. However,  
you fail to point out flaws in the content and instead call me names. This is
the argument of a man who has no argument.
If you have a point to make, make it. This time, try for complete thoughts.
Maybe even paragraphs. Petty, line-by-line, soundbite-sized insults may make 
you popular with the
no-brain crowd, but I have seen that the people here can actually engage in
intelligent discussion. If you keep up your style, you may have a horde of
followers, but none of them will be worthy of your spittle. I hope anyone who
bothers to read through this whole message will see that there is a lot more 
to me than my original "how very lame" post. Anyone who can't see beyond that 
is not worth arguing with.
Matt
amherst college has nothing to do with my ideas, nor am i in any way indicative
of the student body. my thoughts are my own and anyone else who shares my 
opinions is insane. 
"I'd rather be elitist than a clone" - Anonymous