From: andy@cbmvax.commodore.com (Andy Finkel)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: I am giving up on the Amiga
Date: 29 Jul 92 03:05:39 GMT
Reply-To: andy@cbmvax.commodore.com (Andy Finkel)
Organization: Flying Cat Software

In article <1992Jul28.174823.6380@msi.com> bill@msi.com writes:
>andy@cbmvax.commodore.com (Andy Finkel) writes:
>: >Ahhh more Amigoid OS/2 bullshit.  Have you seen it run?  From what I've
>: >heard, a 386SX-20 w/8MB RAM runs OS/2 2.0 quite well.  If you just want
>: 
>: 
>: Let me get this straight...you flame someone for complaining on the
>: speed of OS/2 on anything less than a 386DX-33 without seeing
>: it run;  yet you imply that you've not seen it run on a 386SX either 
>: in your counter aggument ?
>
>I haven't seen it run, but other OS/2 users have.  I believe it was
>Timothy Sipples, quite a trustworthy source.

Bill, let me try it again.  Someone posted an argument based on
hearsay;  he never tried it himself.  You quite rightly called
him on it;  but the argument you used to counter it was as much
hearsay as the original argument.

Do you see the problem now ?

If someone says "I heard from someone that the 586 was going to be late"
and you counter with "no, you don't work for Intel.  I don't either, and
I heard from someone else that it was going to be on time"  
you are not exactly countering the argument.  In fact, since you originally
flamed the guy for using hearsay evidence, by using it yourself immediately
thereafter you don't do much for the debating reputation of Bill Poitras.

Is it any clearer to you now ?

Giving the 'source' a name doesn't help much.  Unless Timothy
(whoever he is) has deputized you to speak for him, posts it
himself, or published it in a source that you can reference, 
you don't add anything to your argument.  For instance, if someone said  
that he'd  heard that Vice-President Quayle also believes that a 386 PC with 
4 megs of memory could run OS/2 just fine....

You can best counter arguments by posting facts, not rumor, innuendo,
or hearsay.  Personal experience is usually good for countering hearsay.
A good statment would be "OS2 2.0 with 6 megs on a 386SX was good enough
for me, so that's what I use."  That would be just about perfect,
in fact.  Somewhat less impressive would be "While setting up
my 386SX I booted once with 4 megs of ram, and it seemed OK.  Of course,
I still added that extra 4 megs of ram 30 minutes later."  Even less
impressive would be "I wandered by an office, and I saw someone
running a 386SX with 6 megs of ram, and he wasn't whining all that
much".  Your statement, not even involving even that much personal
experience, is worth somewhat less. :-(


If you now go out, and gain the personal experience, and post "see,
I was right, OS2 runs great on a 386SX"  wonderful;  you can
now argue from a position of knowledge.  It doesn't change 
what I posted about, since I didn't state an opinion of the
speed, only of the ironic nature of your argument.

>: That's an interesting argument;   The old 
>: "You've never tried it so you don't know; I've never tried it, so I do know"
>: line of reasoning isn't often used.
>: 
>: There's probably a good reason for this.
>: 
>: >| Bill Poitras    | Molecular Simulations Inc.    | Tel (408)522-9229       |
>
>What are you implying, my name, the name of my company, or the fact I
>work in the 408 area code ;-)

I'm not sure quite what is confusing you, but here's a couple hints on
the meanins of the formatting near the end of my post:

A usenet convention I've always observed is that the comments to a statement
immediately follow the original statement.  Seldom does the comment
preceed the statement.  I believe most people posting also
follow this convention.  

I also find it a help to put a single
line of the signature of the person I'm responding to just before
my own signature.  In discussions with multiple participants this
prevents a certain amount of confusion.

>| Bill Poitras    | Molecular Simulations Inc.    | Tel (408)522-9229       |


		andy
-- 
andy finkel		{uunet|rutgers|amiga}!cbmvax!andy

"A new release is where old bad assumptions are replaced by new
 bad assumptions."

Any expressed opinions are mine; but feel free to share.
I disclaim all responsibilities, all shapes, all sizes, all colors.