Here's the deal

In article <[email hidden]>,

hotmoon said:

If you post anything that is embarrassing or denigrating to the
pharmaceutical/medical complex, then certain medical brown-nosers will
attack you and everything that you say, no matter the merits of what
you say.

I can't agree things are that bad -- and let's not forget how silly so
many (but by no means all) of the pro-alt postings are. We do have a
few posters that I think are too dogmantically anti-alt, though.

Quoted message said:

I suspect that the same goes the other way, although I tend not to
notice it going the other way simply because I am on the herb ninny
side.

I notice it. I assure you it does happen.

Quoted message said:

Can we just accept posts on their own merits and not attack them
because they make our "side" look bad or because they have been posted
by people who generally try to make our "side" look bad. Or is truth
and tolerance asking too much.

Depends on who you ask -- for some of our esteemed contributors, it is
*definitely* asking too much.

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants
were standing on my shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT)

hotmoon said:

If you post anything that is embarrassing or denigrating to the
pharmaceutical/medical complex, then certain medical brown-nosers will
attack you and everything that you say, no matter the merits of what
you say.

I suspect that the same goes the other way, although I tend not to
notice it going the other way simply because I am on the herb ninny
side.

Can we just accept posts on their own merits and not attack them
because they make our "side" look bad or because they have been posted
by people who generally try to make our "side" look bad. Or is truth
and tolerance asking too much.

Truth n. conformity to fact or reality; integrity; constancy; exactness;
reality; verified fact.

Pretty hard to tolerate those dangerous loons on this group, who so
blatantly posts *un*truths.

Quoted message said:

Pretty hard to tolerate those dangerous loons on this group, who so
blatantly posts *un*truths.

The correct term for them is 'biased opinions.'
Ant

Anth said:

Quoted message said:

Pretty hard to tolerate those dangerous loons on this group, who so
blatantly posts *un*truths.

The correct term for them is 'biased opinions.'
Ant

No. If they aren't fact (proven). Then they aren't truths.

"hotmoon" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

If you post anything that is embarrassing or denigrating to the
pharmaceutical/medical complex, then certain medical brown-nosers will
attack you and everything that you say, no matter the merits of what
you say.

Life's like that on Usenet.

Quoted message said:

I suspect that the same goes the other way, although I tend not to
notice it going the other way simply because I am on the herb ninny
side.

Exactly.

Quoted message said:

Can we just accept posts on their own merits and not attack them
because they make our "side" look bad or because they have been posted
by people who generally try to make our "side" look bad. Or is truth
and tolerance asking too much.

That would be nice. But, generally, people debate the merits of things they
tend to believe in. So things aren't likely to change.

le moo