On Mar 25, 3:26 am, David Friedman <d...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
cluelessed:
> In article
> <fac1c16f-eadf-49b2-bef3-8107f593b...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
> Andre Lieven <andrelie...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 24, 9:52 pm, "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > > Douglas Berry <penguin_...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > > > "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > > >> (Evelyn, Douglas, this is your cue to start flaming Alan for
daring
> > > >> to ask a question rather than doing his own research.)
> > > > Nah, I'd rather flame you. See, if you had asked the question it
> > > > would have come out like this:
> > > > "That's not possible, and I suspect that you are lying for your
own
> > > > purposes! I demand that you back up these claims!"
>
> > > Please show me where I called anyone a liar, or demanded anything
> > > of anyone.
>
> > The latter has already been shown to you.
>
> > You started your side of the Philcon Moves thread fairly reasonably:
>
> > Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.fandom
> > From: "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > Date: 23 Feb 2008 15:16:13 -0500
> > Local: Sat, Feb 23 2008 4:16 pm
> > Subject: Philcon is in New Jersey (!) this year
>
> > Philcon will be in Cherry Hill, New Jersey, November 21-23, the
> > weekend before Thanksgiving.
> > I'm not sure if I can get there. I have updated
> >http://KeithLynch.net/cons.htmlto
reflect my possible absence.
> >
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > ----------------
>
> > Your last two sentences suggest that, whether or not you had explored
> > any alternative ( to you ) means of trans****t to the con, that you
> > had arrived at a decision, and that is completely your right to do for
> > yourself.
>
> How do you get that from "I'm not sure if I can get there?" That makes
> it pretty clear that he hasn't arrived at a decision, presumably due to
> insufficient information.
It does indicate a direction for his decision. If he were truely, at
that point,
undecided, given that Philcon is still eight months away, there would
be
no need to inform people that he may not be there. Its not like hes
GOH
material there...
> > But, you then outliered your way into a hissy fit aimed at people who
> > dare to live differently from you:
>
> > Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.fandom
> > From: "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > Date: 10 Mar 2008 21:24:02 -0400
> > Local: Mon, Mar 10 2008 9:24 pm
> > Subject: Re: Philcon is in New Jersey (!) this year
>
> > Evelyn C. Leeper <elee...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > > In other words, walking to meals is a definite problem.
>
> > What about walking to the *hotel*? I go to Philcon on the Chinatown
> > bus from DC. How far is this year's hotel from Philadelphia's
> > Chinatown? Is there a city bus that goes that way? Philcon's
> > website doesn't say.
>
> > > In a suburban hotel, you can easily drive to a variety of
> > > restaurants.
>
> > Is Philcon intended for all fans, or only for motorists?
> >
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > ---------
>
> > Now, while its true that your last line right above is neither a lie
> > not an *overt* demand, it does show that in your view, catering
> > in any way to fans who dare drive to cons is, in your view, a Bad
> > Idea.
>
> No. It implies that, in his view, catering only for fans who drive is a
> bad idea.
Which is a Straw Whore. As he utterly failed to provide any actual
evidence that the concom did any such thing.
Further, his and your statements are pregnant with the ASSumption
that car versus transit accessability are either the MOST im****tant
or ONLY consideration that the Philcon concom used in picking that
facility. Neither of you offered *any proof* for this absurd claim.
I thus, properly and summarily, reject such outlier nonsense.
> > It further suggests that, if a concom dares to use a facility that
> > is neither on an urban rapid transit line or a Chinatown bus stop,
> > that that is some form of " discrimination " against the difference
> > between the set of " all fans " and the set of " only ( for )
> > motorists. "
>
> > In *your* words. Which set up an untrue claim.
>
> He doesn't use the word "discrimination" at all.
He strongly hints at it; I merely made it a more honest statement.
> He is responding to
> someone whose solution to the problem of finding restaurants depends on
> having a car, by pointing out that that not all fans will have cars.
Once again, Straw Whoring. Are you seriously suggesting that non car
owning fans CANNOT get lifts from car owning fans ? Madness !
> > In that stated view of yours, you are spectacularly wrong and
> > narcissistic, in your position, for it is 1) Not the concom's job
> > to arrange the con just to suit your demands, and 2) It IS your
> > responsibility to arrange your travel needs to any con, or to any
> > destination that you want/need to get to.
>
> He started out by saying he might not be getting to it.
And, I pointed out that, had he stayed at that point, his comment
would
have been 100% reasonable and his right to decide upon. Further, had
he seriously asked about transit/pedestrian options to the new site,
that
would also have been quite ( uncharacteristically ) reasonable for
him.
> > Many people showed that you *have* alternatives in getting to
> > Philcon, should you choose to, but you swept that all aside due to
> > your annoyance at feeling picked on ( Which really was discussion
> > where your view is NOT taken as The One True Way ).
>
> Keith asked for examples of his behaving in the way Douglas implied he
> behaved. You are instead offering your conclusions. It's clear that you
> don't much like Keith--a fate he seems to share with quite a lot of the
> human race, judging by your past posts. But you have offered no sup****t
> for half of what Douglas implied and little for the other half.
<Shrug> So you claim, yet you have nothing to offer to sup****t your
claim.
Thats also par for the course for you.
> > And, its perfectly fine to " ask questions ", where such questions
> > are really actual questions, and not statements in fig leaf disguise,
> > which your " only for motorists " whine was. You earned the
> > criticism that came your way for 1) being dishonest in that way,
> > and for 2) inventing a false antagonism between " all fans " and
> > " only for motorists ".
>
> All fans are motorists?
For someone who styles himself as a writer, you are deficient about
the use and meaning of specific words of the language ( This strongly
suggests to me that you are a bad writer, when it comes to fiction,
as well. ).
I specified that Keith Straw Whored into existance a false
*antagonism*,
NOT a false *difference*. Duh. Learn to read for comprehension.
> There are no conflicts of interest wrt con
> location between those who are and those who are not?
If there are, they are very small. I, for example, am a car owner, and
I
thus like it when the parking at a con is at no additional charge.
Yet,
I had no issue with attending all the recent downtown Philly Philcons,
and paying for the parking. Even I, as a non ever Philly resident,
had
no problem finding much cheaper parking than with those downtown
Philcon hotels.
My point is that, while most of us driving fen would *like* to not
have
an additional cost/charge for parking our vehicles, I seriously doubt
that
any such downtown con has lost member****ps due to driving fen deciding
that the parking charge would be " too much " for them to cover.
Any such claimant would bear the burden of positive proof for such a
claim. Until they ( you ) provide some such, a doubter such as I has
NOTHING to rebut...
Andre
|
