Re: Mailing List Quality

Crosby_M (
Tue, 1 Oct 1996 17:48:00 -0400

On 9/29/96 I wrote about Reilly Jones' "apparent notion that anyone who
speaks must do so with 100% certainty."

On 10/01/96 Reilly responded: "You may back this up with the appropriate
quote from me, showing where I even remotely asserted this. I don't
recognize it in the slightest."

Reilly never asserted any such thing.

But, just to explain where I was coming from, on 9/24/96 Reilly did
"The distinction between certainty and uncertainty is digital. You are
either certain or you are uncertain.... The instant you have a doubt
about something, you are uncertain."
And ...
In the context of a discussion about 'junk' on the list, and while
pondering the the difficulty of philosophical discussion without using
ambiguous terms, of making clear but concise statements of one's ideas,
of avoiding divergence, of misinterpreting another's arguments, I
diverged big-time and improperly linked Reilly's 9/24 statement, plus
the idea that tolerance is indifference, with _my own_ thought that, if
any of these can get you classified as a nihilist or imbecile or
junk-poster, then the implication must be that it's better not to speak
out if you're uncertain.

Just to be clear (so we can move on to more productive discussions), my
'apparent notion' was just that, mine, and was improperly attributed to

Reilly also added: "[G]o back and read my posts, I have included a
wealth of constructive ideas, and constructive sources to pursue. If
you only want to dwell on the negative, that's your perogative, but it
doesn't make the positive nonexistent."

A most 'incisive' point!

Mark Crosby