>
> Arguing over semantics, repeatedly, does that sometimes. I would guess
> he's just disgusted at the entire argument and would rather see it die.
George, I have a point other than semantics. How would you suggest
arguing with Daniel? I'm intereted in hearing the answer, because
I have found him to completely ignore the meaning behind my words,
to call names (which he has been doing since the beginning of this
thread), and to basically restate things you've already agreed
with. How do you handle someone who will not address your points?
+------------------------------------------------------------+
| Ensure that you have read the CircleMUD Mailing List FAQ: |
| http://democracy.queensu.ca/~fletcher/Circle/list-faq.html |
+------------------------------------------------------------+
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/08/00 PST