I am willing to provide minimal explanatory information. I won't engage in extended discussion because I found it fruitless and unproductive. I was apparently unable to make myself clear because I found myself answering the same erroneous misconceptions about my views or their bases over and over without satisfying either myself or, apparently, anyway else that we were even achieving clarity on our points of difference. To the extent that there seemed to be mutual understanding -- a very small extent from my point of view, and I am sure that was largely my fault -- we mainly seemed to face irreconcilable disagreement about values, theory, method, and even basic facts that there was no point that I could see in re-rehearsing over again. Several intensive and extended rounds of this wore me out to no good purpose. My time and energy is limited. I have papers to write for tenure. These lists are for discussion, but not fruitless discussion, at least, fruitless discussion is not what appeals to me about them.
--- Charles Brown <cbrown at michiganlegal.org> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> andie nachgeborenen
>
> As I said, I'm not going to discuss this issue. The
> answer is yes, but that is all I will say now.
>
> ^^^^^
> CB: You always say you are not going to discuss this
> issue, but then you
> always discuss it some. Go ahead. Discuss it.
> Nothing bad will happen.
> There's always some arguing going on around here.
> What else are these types
> of email lists for _but_ to discuss this kind of
> issue ?
>
>
>
> ___________________________________
>
http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
____________________________________________________________________________________ Don't get soaked. Take a quick peek at the forecast with the Yahoo! Search weather shortcut. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/shortcuts/#loc_weather