From: Kalkor (kalkor@kalkor.com)
Date: Thu Feb 07 2002 - 16:42:42 MST
Why yes, I will interject:
[athenonrex]
to hide the truth with polysylabic words that are esoteric in nature, when a
monosylabic word will suffice. in other words, to use long, decietful words,
when short, truthful ones will work just as well.
[joedees]
Anti-intellectualism would indeed seem to suit your limitations. I use the
words I use because they best fit the double exigency I demand of my posts;
precision and concision.
[athenonrex]
that is not anti-intellectualism, it is pointing out that you are
superfulus. you are using "big" words when a simple word would be not only
as accurate, but would also allow the members of CoV with a more limited
vocabulary to join in with the discussion. have you even read any of my
previous posts? the ones not related to this thread anyway? if not, read
them. you will find that i am far from "anti intellectual" but rather aware
of my surroundings and others in my surrounding, be they electronic or real
life.what i was trying to point out as a side note was that the manner in
which you write is akin to the speech writers of corrupt politicians.
[Kalkor]
Allow us to join in the discussion? He's not preventing me in any way from
doing so; quite the contrary. He has improved my vocabulary because I have
access to devices (known as "books", or more specifically, "dictionaries"
and "thesaurii") which I may use to learn the definition of the words he
uses, and through his writing I am also able to ascertain some of the
accepted contextual uses of these words.
In addition, athenonrex, your anthropomorphizing of "words" by calling them
"decietful" or "truthful" makes me discount everything else you say as the
maunderings of a lunatic. Just my reaction; anyone else doing this?
Kalkor
sticking my fingers in my ears and babbling...
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 25 2002 - 13:28:42 MDT