On 20 Apr, 14:20, Peter Clinch wrote:
Toom Tabard wrote:
It was, and still is, merely a simple question to which there can be a
simple answer.

It /can/ also be a decidedly loaded question, and given the asker in the
original case the possibility of that being the case is remarkably high.
*If you think it is just simple, period, then you're being simplistic,
whether by intent or nature I don't know.

It is also the case that the "simple answer" can very easily be loaded
with far more significance than it really supports, as has often been
done and will doubtless be done again. *And since it has often been
done, and doubtless will be done again, it is worth flagging that up.

But there is the now the question of whether people about to read your
contribution should be advised to strap themselves into their seat and
fit airbags at head height on the nearest wall.

Or the question of whether you'll conform to your track record and throw
in some ad hominem attacks on folk that don't agree with you rather than
address the points raised? *Oh no, that's just been answered, and you did.


It's a bit difficult to address the 'points' you raise if they are
mere endless and irrelevant vacuous twaddle.
Socrates had his Plato to expand on every question he raised. What did
I do to deserve you?

Toom