Re: Eastercon 2010

In article <75jru316e06u6egenkgj0bhfqkljr41jtq@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
 Douglas Berry <penguin_boy@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

> On  Thu, 27 Mar 2008 21:49:58 -0700 David Friedman
> <ddfr@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> carved the following into the hard
> stone of rec.arts.sf.fandom 
> >In article <rqjou314rbqp5uhjol8kc2d1rgaes83cie@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
> > Douglas Berry <penguin_boy@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >
> >> On  26 Mar 2008 23:06:34 -0400 "Keith F. Lynch" <kfl@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> >> carved the following into the hard stone of rec.arts.sf.fandom 
> >> 
> >> >I thought mine was a reasonable question, and I still do.  What do
> >> >you think is unreasonable about it?
> >> 
> >> It's tone. Rather than simply asking about methods of getting to the
> >> con for people who don't drive, you accused the concom of being in
> >> some sort of conspiracy to deprive you of your ability to attend.
> >
> >I think it requires real effort to extract from what Keith posted an 
> >accusation of conspiracy. He apparently thought the concom was paying 
> >less attention to the problem of people without cars than it should. He

> >might or might not be correct, but that isn't an accusation of 
> >conspiracy.
> 
> Read what he actually wrote. He made a comment about the PhilCon
> committee trying to exclude non-drivers. Typical of what little
> interaction I've had with Keith.

1. If he made such a comment, you ought to be able to quote it, instead 
of relying on your interpretation. 

2. I think the final sentence explains how you managed to read 
accusations of conspiracy into a question.

-- 
 http://www.daviddfriedman.com/
http://daviddfriedman.blogspot.com/
 Author of _Harald_, a fantasy without magic.
 Published by Baen, in bookstores now