Karel Kriz wrote:
> In article <fpelj9$5ep$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
> Frank Bures <feeb@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>> Karel Kriz wrote:
>>> In article <fovata$uie$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
>>> Frank Bures <feeb@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The camera does not lie: Former centres of learning and intellectual
>>>> diversity are now indoctrination sites systemically dedicated to the
>>>> abbreviation of human curiosity and the alienation of students from
>>>> Western
>>>> civilization.
>>>>
>>>> I often wonder where in Canada I could "go home again" in the 21st
>>>> century.
>>>> I have one simple, symbolic criterion: a learning centre that would
still
>>>> hold up for critical admiration the greatness in the writings of
Thomas
>>>> Wolfe, a hard-drinking, aggressively hetero***ual white male from a
racist
>>>> background, whose creative inspiration was Western civilization's
literary
>>>> treasure trove and whose overriding theme was his passion for
America.
>>>>
>>>> That's a tall order nowadays. I only know one three-year arts program
in
>>>> Canada today I'd be glad to call my intellectual home, and I fear for
its
>>>> survival.
>>> This article blew me away. Bures accused me of just "scanning it", but
>>> NO-OOO, I read every word.
>> To put words in someone mouth is not too ethical, but it happens.
>> To intentionally misquote someone is reaching new low even for you.
>> There is no phrase "scanning it" anywhere in my original post.
>
> A new low? Even for me? What on earth are you talking about?
>
> You wrote:
> "Karel,
>
> have you read the article? Or just glanced over it?"
>
> glanced = scanned more or less. So what's the problem?
>
>
> K
Well, you obviously do not have ANY experience with attributing and
quoting an original text in your own creations.
Let me give you a short and simple explanation.
Let's say I write:
Karel Kriz wrote that the article blew his mind.
Obviously you did not say that, you said the it "blew [you] away".
However, as I did not use quotation marks, my statement is not a quote and
as such it is permitted in civilized circles.
OTOH, if you write
Bures accused me of just "scanning it", you quote me directly and
therefore
you have to be able to prove, that I wrote "scanning it" in my original
text. Obviously I did not and therefore you intentionally misquoted me,
in
other words you put words I never wrote right into my mouth.
That's a strict no-no in civilized circles.
And BTW, I did not accuse you of anything. As the sentence you quoted
above proves - I asked you if "[you] just glanced over [the article]". I
did not accuse you of doing it nor I said you did it.
If I ask you "did you see the movie XYZ", I am not assuming or implying
that you did - I am just asking.
So, to summarize: Either you have basic problems with comprehension of
written text (which I doubt), or you intentionally change the meaning of
other peoples' posts so that you can argue with something they did not
write. An English term "erecting a straw man" comes to mind.
Cheers
Frank
--
<feeb@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
|
