Stephanie Zvan is an ignorant bully, but she's also absolutely right that the stuff here is vile, stupid, bollox: http://bit.ly/WdVprB
-
@PhilosophyExp Could you not point to the vile stuff without the name calling? Pretty strong name calling too. Just sayin'
-
-
@PhilosophyExp I was thinking about the experimented cited by@BoraZ here: http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/a-blog-around-the-clock/2013/01/28/commenting-threads-good-bad-or-not-at-all/ … -
@AdrianaHeguy Sure, but Zvan was happy to allow one of her commentators to call me an "active racist and sexist" last week, so... you know. -
@PhilosophyExp Not that I haven't said stupid things myself before. Who hasn't? it's worth to make the effort not to engage in tit-for-tat -
@AdrianaHeguy INot tit for tat. I wanted to be clear the fact I'm defending Zvan doesn't mean I think her behaviour generally is justified. -
@PhilosophyExp Yes, but you could have said: "I often disagree with Z, but this stuff is truly vile"...etc -
@AdrianaHeguy Sure, but the issue isn't that I disagree with her. I disagree with you about this, but I'd never call you a bully, etc. -
@PhilosophyExp So you think she *is* an ignorant bully. But do you have to say it? My point is: not conducive to discussion -
@AdrianaHeguy But it might be conducive to making the point that I'm not justifying a systematic pattern of behaviour. - 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
@PhilosophyExp ObviouslyThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@PhilosophyExp Damn the spelling gods. I meant "experiment" not "experimented."Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.