FlyerTalk Forums - View Single Post - Discussion of Religious Travelers Forum Actions
Old Nov 3, 2004 | 12:49 pm
  #15  
Dovster
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend, In Memoriam
10 Countries Visited
20 Countries Visited
30 Countries Visited
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Yiron, Israel
Programs: Bates Motel Plat
Posts: 69,201
Originally Posted by Randy Petersen
Not mud-slinging? Then why would you start a question pointing out another candidates supposed position?.
Randy, again, there can be no question of mud-slinging because there was no dirt. I didn't say that Spiff had done anything of which he should be ashamed.

As far as pointing out another candidate's supposed position is concerned, consider the following: An incumbent has both an advantage and a disadvantage -- and both are his record.

Voters had only the choice to take on faith that what I was saying were indeed my positions. They had no chance to see what I have done in the past. Whether it works to their advantage or to their disadvantage, that is not true of incumbents. Should I chose to run again in the future, I hope and expect to be judged by my own record.

In this case, TalkBoard tabled the issue of a religious traveller's forum without ever voting on it. That is not my unsubstantiated charge -- Spiff stated that.

This issue had been requested (or at least supported) by 22 individual posters on this one thread, so it can not be a matter of TalkBoard not being aware of it. The simple fact is that it did not want to vote on the forum. In order to have a vote, one TalkBoard member has to make a motion and another has to second it. That did not happen here.

Agreed, it is possible that Spiff actually made that motion but that no one else supported it. However, as you pointed out, "Spiff clearly uses the word 'we'll' in your statement." In other words, he included himself in the TalkBoard position.

In view of that, it is hardly unreasonable for me to believe that it was a position that he, too, held.

If I am wrong, I am happy -- if for no other reason than it will make it easier to get a religious travellers' forum passed by a TalkBoard that includes Spiff.

But as far your charge of mudslinging is concerned, I consider that an unfair and insulting attack on me. To state, even in error if it were indeed an error, that a person holds a position which is in no way immoral or illegal, can not be construed as mudslinging.

If you want to accuse me of discussing an incumbent's record, I will plead guilty. If you want to say that I misunderstood him, I will admit that is a possibility. But I in no way accept that I slung any mud at Spiff.
Dovster is offline