Google| Subject | Re: Calumet files Chapter 7 |
| From | Sandman |
| Date | 2014-04-05 11:27 (2014-04-05 11:27) |
| Message-ID | <slrnljvj88.9me.mr@irc.sandman.net> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
| Follows | Eric Stevens |
In article <2tjuj997c3toessl655t27646k703v38ls@4ax.com>, Eric Stevens wrote:
Eric Stevens
Taking that apart:
1. "Ignoring something is an active action, not stating something isn't."
It depends upon whether or not the speaker knows of the 'something'. If the speaker knows, not stating the something is a result of a deliberate decision by the speaker - to not state.Exactly - which is why I asked Tony to substantiate this supposed knowledge of nospam.
You may note, however, that the claim is this:
"in *all* purchases online, there is no sales help available."
And Tony is claiming that nospam is ignoring this supposed "fact". So the assumption is that nospam is aware of, and agree with, that there is no online sales help available.
At the time of the claim, and as far as I know, nospam had yet to give any information about his knowledge, or opinion on the matter. As it turns out, he has since done that, and his reply to this was:
nospam 04/01/2014 <010420141735494666%nospam@nospam.invalid>
"false. some online sellers have a *lot* of sales help on their site"
So since the original claim it is clear that nospam did *not* ignore this, since he is of the opinion that the claim being made is incorrect.
So, how could nospam be deliberately ignoring something he doesn't even agree exists?
And again, for the record, I agree that the supposed fact that Tony is claiming isn't in fact even true, and thus not even something that CAN be ignored. I.e. Tony could just as easily have said "You're ignoring the fact that elephants can fly".
Hope that helps, Eric! And have a great day!
(Tonight I'll be going to Arlanda and then to USA) :)
-- Sandman[.net]
2014-03-13-
-
