> I was a college debater and enjoy many sorts of intellectual argument, but your posts do not advance an open objective of persuasion,

Welcome to the real world then! College debating is not equal to real life conversations.

> you seem to be concerned with the opinions of other HN readers.

I couldn't care less. I am concerned with bigotry and bullying. Even then, these people have little value in my life, as it should be, you should not let bully's gain value in your life.

> In fact, many of the points you raise are completely valid, but the manner in which you deliver them repel others from joining with your side.

Disagree. Firstly, the form of the message has nothing whatsoever to do with the validity of the message. I could say "Joe is an asshole and a thief" or "Joe is a man who exhibits nothing but condescension and lack of consideration towards others. He is also known for his lack of respect for property ownership rights and has been known to, at times, take other's property and use it as his own.". Both true. Both deliver pretty much the same message. One is VERY efficient. The other one could be an attempt to sound erudite and pseudo intellectual.

I go for brevity and clarity. I am not concerned with what people think about the form of the message. In fact, it says a lot about a person when they can discuss the merits of an idea without judging the form that stands in front of them. A homeless man in dirty clothes can utter just as valid a statement as a Wall Street millionaire in a $2,000 suit. The bigot is the one who is only interested in having a discussion with the $2,000 suit.

Go back and read my very first comment on this thread. This one:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8440555

Now, pray tell, what about that post "repels others from joining" my side?

Instead I got an immediate stream of attacks from people who didn't bother to go over to Google and type:
"effects of repealing the 55 mile per hour speed limit"

and find articles such as this one:

http://www.cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/speed-doesn...

And, of course, the article another HN poster found:

http://www.motorists.org/speed-limits/55-mph-study.pdf

And, of course a bunch of FLAWED articles with opposing views.

And so, my post would have been a trigger for learning. Rather than me hand-picking links that only support my view of the universe it is left up to the reader to do a little work and try to understand where I may have been coming from. I mean, we are arguing over typing half a dozen words into Google and spending some time reading.

Instead these people prefer to immediately down-vote, post a bunch of one sided flawed links and, to use a term from another thread, pour hot flaming oil on the messenger. I call these people morons. And rightly so. I mean, in one case the poster listed a bunch of links and then admits:

"raising speed limits increases the rate of road fatalities, at least on highways that are not designed with the features of the Interstate Highway System highways"

Really? Really? C'mon. Look, I'm not a kid. I probably have 30 years on the average HN member. Please give me the benefit of the doubt when I say that a segment of our youth has lost touch with reality in a measurable way. Everything has to be spoon fed. Nobody wants to work for anything. Everyone is a genius. Nobody wants to get their hands dirty. Respect is an almost non-existing commodity. And critical thinking, well, we are far more likely to find Elvis in the building than solid critical thinking skills in the average population of 20-somethings, college or not.

So, yes, want to debate me? No problem. Go do the research and come back with trustworthy data --not nonsense-- and we can discuss the merits of my position at length with civility. I will NOT do the work for you. I, in principle, REFUSE to do that.

In this particular case I lived through the relevant period and was very familiar with all the arguments of the time. So I didn't pull my statements out of my anus. As verified by a bunch of links you can discover yourself, this happened (the insane political claims about raising the speed limit) and as early as a couple of years later they were all shown to be not a little wrong but monumentally insanely wrong.

So yes, what I said was, as far as I remember, absolutely factual. It just so happened it did not align with the post-diaper sensibilities of the 20-something HN crowd who only know about attacking the messenger and are obviously too fucking lazy to take just a few minutes to learn something before flapping their jaws. I am not saying this is you. I am saying this is "them", whoever "them" might be.

If you are interested in discussing the topic from a frame of reference where you have done the research to learn and come back to me with questions or objections I would be honored to do so. My life has been about constant learning. Nothing better than learning something new. Having an intelligent discussion with someone who is informed and not spewing nonsense is a fantastic way to learn. In fact, I engage in this all the time in real life by participating in a range of meetups from technology to business. Always neat to interact with people who are there to learn an not to put people down because of what they look like, who they are, how they say things, etc.