Posted by Wayne on February 13, 2001 at 16:59:06:
In Reply to: A response to Ken posted by MHK on February 13, 2001 at 13:50:12:
I read Ken's five responses and found them to be clearly written to explain his positions. I am glad he took the time to write them up in such detail.
I think he did a good job of explaining his views and explaining how he developed them. That you and I might disagree with his views is true, but you are working awfully hard to try to say he disagrees with himself.
I try to put things into my own frame of reference and see how they look.
For myself, when I state my views in a discussion, I recognize that it is possible for incorrect conclusions of my core beliefs to be drawn. Then if questioned I can clear it up so others know my core and beliefs and how they relate to the specific details which caused the confusion. So far this sounds like normal life and conversation.
I think that this exactly explains what Ken wrote. After reading his five posts I know where he stands. Maybe his prior postings and statements in your presence indicated to you that he felt differently, but he has now set the record straight and said clearly what he believes in and why. So why do you continue to argue that he cannot believe what he says based on the past?
Not meaning to be mean spirited, but to me it seems the same as if I said: Gee Mike, you used to dive solo, you used to use a computer, and you used to dive on air. Therefore no matter what you say now, we all know you used to say and do otherwise. Therefore you must really believe that it is best to dive solo, use a computer, and dive on air. And you must continuously be ready to have these attrocities thrown into your face no matter what you say is your current position or opinion. I'll bet you would think that unfair and I think some of your recent postings are similarly unfair.
You or I might disagree with Ken and each other. We can do our level best to make compelling arguments to convince others that our opinions are better, but we have to argue for or against clarified opinions rather than dredging up lines out of context. A more civil method would be to say 'You once said X. Did I understand you to infer you also mean Y?' If the answer is 'no' it is time to move on.
I really hope that the civility level on this board ratchets up a few notches. It is up to all of us to take the responsibility to see that it does.
Wayne