h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

hey member,

bumped into you when reading conversations all over the guide. you've sure got a habit of kicking up a fuss. Or you might argue other people have a habit of taking exception to what you write.

now, you're going to get very few opinions from me, since i'm interested mainly in why this seems to happen. and since there seems to be no shortage of people ready to demonise you and criticise then it might make sense for me to assure you now that that is not my intent. (prob won't even happen accidentilly)

latest posting i've come across is the montreal massacre. which you've prob heard enough of for a while but it suits my purpose.

so, a quick summary of what i'm going to say. You are able to argue quite eloquently and well, and do usualy back up your points. i'm guessing that you dislike people who are all opinion and put too many emotions, or emotions at all into a rational discussion. people have accused you of being bereft of conscience or tact. and seem to get on the high horse about much of what you have to say.

Big thing that i noticed. you talk about women being partly responsible for rape and generated a lot of anger by saying this in front of a girl telling (almost certainly truely, i'm trying to take nothing for granted here) that she had been the victim of an assualt and rape. First reaction of mine was to stare in disbelief. Emotion tells me that that is one of the most insensitive acts i have witnessed in a while. (though i've seen worse)

however, you are perfectly entitled to do so. and arguing in your logical way, you explained this. people are understandably (that word doesn't automatically mean i agree with their viewpoint) angry about this.

So since all your posts you seem to argue very logicaly, and advocate a fairer world, why do you think people take such offence at what you say?

i'm sure you wouldn't revert to name calling, or imperious haughty answers since that genuinely doesn't seem your style.

another question, do you not honestly think that you could perhaps make allowances for other people. especially those who charge their arguments with emotions and will attack what they see before looking at what is said. That was not a critisicm, it was just a chance to see your views, you are obviously quite outspoken and hold strong opinions and enjoy telling people what you think but do you want people to listen, appreciate and think, or to blithely defend without thinking? if the latter, then an agressivel style is definitely the way to go about it. if not, then catering for other people's emotions, where right or wrong those emotions play a huge part in how people interact, might make for a more productive discussion.


anyway, i may have comlpletely mis-judged here, you could enjoy controversy for its own sake, you could merely be winding people up for enjoyment (trust me its fun!)

but i'd be interested to hear what you've got to say about this.

was going to post this in the converstion but it's proabably better here.

yours in anticipation

shhhmichael