<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Dovster:
As this is not directly connected to any of the issues being discussed right now, but is a very important question that needs to be answered, I decided to make it a separate thread. </font>
Dovster, you know your above argument has some grain of intellectual partisanship and is not transparently honest in this situation. I say this because your comments starting this thread are actually connected to many of the issues being discussed here right now. But now onto this matter:
Knowingly calling someone a terrorist when they are not is a lie.
Knowingly calling someone a nazi when they are not is a lie.
Knowingly calling someone a homosexual when they are not is a lie.
When one is knowingly trying to pin a label that they know to be more likely a lie than the truth, and when it is not done in jest, then it is a "flame". You can play creatively with denotative meanings of a word, but when you play creatively with connotative meanings of a label such that said label may wrongfully ruin someone's reputation on unsubstantiated bases, that is a "flame".
I stand by the moderators in the case of ap2110's attack on IJK. If IJK does not see at as an attack, then well and good; but it's still a personal attack in my book; and its an attack meant to inhibit debate -- and that's why I truly stand with the moderators on this one.
[This message has been edited by GUWonder (edited Jan 23, 2004).]