Re: Mass murder, jokes and immigration [WAS: Re: Massive Starvation

On Sun, 11 May 2008 04:39:39 -0700, nada <dwaltersMIA@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

>> > What apst is is the computer equivalent of arguments in a bar while
>> > drunk. Given a choice between two people to argue with in a bar, one 

>> of
>> > whom is not always 100% honest or consistent and one of whom is
>> > violence-prone, I know which one I'd prefer to argue with.

I hate to make an obvious point--but this analogy is terrible, because  
joking about mass murder is NOT an act of violence. I get the feeling,  
John, that you sometimes actually need to expressly remind yourself that  
you cannot commit violence over the Internet. Of course, that isn't  
strictly true, as a specific and credible physical threat over the  
Internet is legally and actually an act of violence. But surely a joke is 

not.

If someone were actually driven to make the choice, I would wonder whether
 
his addiction was to spirits or to argument. But to me--to repeat what I  
wrote recently--this is a personal decision, a question perhaps of  
personal ethics, not to me a political matter at all. Confronted with the 

choice myself--and assuming somehow I had to choose one or other, despite 

seldom frequenting bars--personal *preference* would pull toward the "not 

always honest" opponent. But personal *ethics* would probably prevail and 

hold out for honest discussion, despite personal risk. So variegated are  
personal ethics...

-- 
srd