Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Chris Buckley <alan@sabir.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: Re: Pearls Before Swine: Uncle Is Not Good With Money
Date: 24 Jan 2025 21:09:19 GMT
Lines: 65
Message-ID: <lvidrvFcju3U1@mid.individual.net>
References: <vlpb2u$3h575$2@dont-email.me> <u7SgP.91142$2xE6.58371@fx18.iad>
 <vm0she$p6n$1@panix2.panix.com>
 <u2faoj9l89c6ighfgck1h1bou8kra7k3lq@4ax.com>
 <vmgrb7$g88$1@panix2.panix.com> <%q9jP.50906$G93a.23994@fx05.iad>
 <vmn9nv$3q8pn$4@dont-email.me> <d7hvojdhhu6fpo8g1gu3utmpebrtas67od@4ax.com>
 <NtQjP.78204$V9s2.30977@fx34.iad> <lvcje4FegflU1@mid.individual.net>
 <IS9kP.105674$Hfb1.59949@fx46.iad> <lvda9bFi24fU1@mid.individual.net>
 <bNekP.350006$ay1.87570@fx12.iad> <lvhq5rF9ibrU1@mid.individual.net>
 <SGOkP.1093943$aTp4.858129@fx09.iad>
X-Trace: individual.net Fo6mgWQcWzF4nSWqXFRYuwuNldCF2Ya65mAlIErqtAwmQvOR5B
Cancel-Lock: sha1:5J9lSUctD0u8j9mggb2xDOToy4g= sha256:qZbtZ2PSUMwpobMlWhrcMw9p1q8eDZkfxzMNU7OwmZc=
User-Agent: slrn/1.0.3 (Linux)
Bytes: 4004

On 2025-01-24, Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote:
> Chris Buckley <alan@sabir.com> writes:
>>On 2025-01-22, Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote:
>>> Chris Buckley <alan@sabir.com> writes:
>>>>On 2025-01-22, Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote:
>>>>> Chris Buckley <alan@sabir.com> writes:
>>>>>>On 2025-01-21, Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>You seem to live in a very different world than I do, Scott.
>>>>>
>>>>> You seem to live in a fantasy world.
>>>>
>>>>Please supply your facts and cogent arguments for this. I gave my
>>>>reason; you did not dispute it at all, providing no evidence.
>
> Let's reset.

I quite understand why you want to reset. Having to defend so many
falsehoods would indeed be time consuming. But please do so.

> I posted a link to the wikipedia article that shows Mr. Trump
> ranked last amongst US presidents.
>
> You didn't address the rankings, you just claimed all historians
> are registered democrats so their rankings are not meaningful.
>
> You clearly didn't read the page which describes the methodology
> of the surveys (which attempted to balance political ideology of
> the respondants).

Yes, we can talk about that once you handle your current backlog of
other claims.

In the meantime though, could you give me a pointer to the exact survey
you base your comments on?  I couldn't find it among the many on the Wikipedia
page. The best match I could find:
1. Wasn't done of historians
2. Absolutely had no "set of consistent and concrete criteria." (Asked for a
single number).
3. Made no attempt to balance ideology (used a straight average of
all respondents including the very heavily outnumbered Republicans.)

That doesn't match most of your criteria; surely that couldn't be the
survey you're talking about?

> Why don't you, first, elaborate on exactly why you think that
> ranking Mr. Trump last is incorrect -- based on the actual
> criteria, not some personal assumptions about ideology of the
> respondents?
>
> You clearly don't understand the use of Hyperbole in argument
> if you're focused on a throwaway comment related to the frequency
> of Mr. Trump's incoherent utterances and namecalling.  Which may not
> be every other word, but could likely be every other sentence.

It wasn't a throwaway comment. It was a direct response to my request
for "data and cogent rebuttal".  If your best cogent rebuttal has to
be a statement that not even you believe is true, your argument has problems!

Since you refined your estimate to every other sentence, I assume you
have the evidence to back that up?  If you're in need of large amounts
of unscripted Trump talk, I might suggest the transcript of the Joe
Rogan podcast.  I await your count of namecalling with great curiosity!

Chris