From: mhulsey@hestia.fcs.uga.edu (Martin Hulsey)
Subject: Re: Quibbling.  Was: Silver Spring monkeys
Followup-To: talk.politics.animals
Organization: Dept. Foods & Nutrition, Univ. of GA
Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1993 15:17:10 GMT

My apologies to everyone for this post which contains information
irrelevant to TPA.  I hope that this issue will end here.  I am posting my
replies rather than mailing them so that Russell may not claim that I am
avoiding his questions.

In article <C058uA.3s3@wpg.com>, russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence) wrote:
> 
> I'll be happy to answer any pertinent questions, assuming that the
> topic suits my interest and I have sufficient time.

I am awaiting your replies.

>I'd suggest
> that you make an effort to weed out your innuendos, your unfounded
> conjectures, and other forms of crap, and try to formulate questions 
> that are directly related to the current threads.

The questions I posed were related to the "current thread" when I
originally posed them.  Now that they have been ignored for some weeks,
they may not be related to the "current thread."
 
> >> #1:  Are you finally willing to admit that your "unanswered questions" 
> >>      about my alleged presence at a meeting in Athens, Georgia, were
> >>      irrelevant to the major issues at hand?   If so, why did you
> >>      repeatedly insist that you were asking pertinent questions?
> > 
> > I believe that I have already admitted such, but my archives are faulty at
> > this point.  Perhaps someone else can fill in the blanks here.  
> 
> I don't recall any such admission.  I do, however, recall a posting
> in which you stated that all your questions were pertinent.  Why don't
> you go ahead and answer the question since you apparently have plenty
> of time?  BTW, please don't confuse "responses" with "answers". 

I admit that my question about your presence in Athens was unrelated to
animal issues.  Nonetheless, this question recieved the most prompt and
forthright answer of any question on the list.  My other questions, which
remain unanswered, were and are pertinent to animal issues.  Please answer
them, or indicate why you believe them to be impertinent.
 
> > I do
> > remember asking you why you offered such a forthright and prompt response
> > to this admittedly irrelevant question, then complained that you would not
> > answer the remainder of the questions because they were irrelevant.  Don't
> > you see the inconsistency here?  Did you or did you not choose to finally
> > answer my questions? 
> 
> Do you recall the following exchange?
> ======================================================================
> Message-ID <mhulsey-221292083956@fatrat.fcs.uga.edu>:
> mh> If this particular question was impertinent, why did it receive 
> mh> the most prompt and straightforward answer ever recorded from you 
> mh> on Usenet?  
> 
> Message-ID: <BzonuJ.3In@wpg.com>
> rl> The answer is: it didn't.  You posed the question many times 
> rl> before I finally decided to respond.  It's probable that I would 
> rl> have neglected to respond had my work schedule been more hectic 
> rl> on the day in question.  It would be foolish, but not atypical, 
> rl> for you to infer that my eventual response confers some sort of 
> rl> merit on your "unanswered questions".  
> ======================================================================

Your response above was not seen by me due to problems with my newsreader.

Please recheck my statement.  I did not indicate that your answer to the
"impertinent" question was "prompt and straightforward," but that it was
the "most prompt and straightforward."
 
> Unanswered question #3:  Why do you often repeat the same false statements
> over and over again?

A loaded question.  I, of course, do not repeat anything that I know or
believe to be false.

>[...]
> Most of your questions aren't particularly difficult and most of them
> strike me as irrelevant to the major issues.   Do you recall the following
> statement in which I attempted to help you make a distinction between
> "evasion" and "disinterest"?

If you cannot or will not answer my questions, please indicate why they are
irrelevant.
 
> ======================================================================
> Message-ID: <BzonuJ.3In@wpg.com>
> Do you understand the concept of a "killfile", Martin?

Yes.

>Usenet users
> often use a "killfile" to skip over the postings of posters they
> consider illogical or disagreeable.

If you ignored my posts altogether, I would assume that I was in your
"killfile."  You responded to my posts, but repeatedly evaded certain
questions.

>[...]
 
> Unanswered questions #4 & #5:   
> 
> Would the presence of a man's name in someone's "killfile" lead 
> us to conclude that his arguments are irrefutable or compelling?

No.
  
> If not, isn't it possible that readers who choose not to reply
> to a given set of questions may not be "evading" the questions,
> but simply choosing not to waste their time responding to someone
> else's stupidity?

Again, if you choose to respond to a particular post, yet fail to answer
questions that are posed repeatedly without providing good reason, you are
evading the questions.

>[...]
> How do you know, Martin?   Did you interview the reporter who wrote
> the article?  

No.

> Unanswered questions #6 & 7: 
> 
> Are you one of those "fundamentalist" types who attempts to explain
> important events in terms of "evil" influences?

No.

>If not, why did
> you assume that PETA was responsible for the WP's statement that the
> case against Taub had been dismissed on technical grounds?

I did not assume that PETA was "responsible."  This post is missing from my
archive as well.  If memory serves, I indicated that WP's assessment of the
Appeals Court opinion was misleading and the same as PETA's.

--
mhulsey@hestia.fcs.uga.edu (Martin G. Hulsey)
Neuroscience, NRA-ILA, SSIB, NAASO, IASO