Vegan (alt.food.vegan) This newsgroup exists to share ideas and issues of concern among vegans. We are always happy to share our recipes- perhaps especially with omnivores who are simply curious- or even better, accomodating a vegan guest for a meal!

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #41 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,uk.environment
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 315
Default Alan Conner, usenet Troll


"Alan Connor" > wrote in message
...


LOL I see what the troll is doing, he's retying to sell a spam
blocker!!

What a hoot! The troll wants to sell crap....

No wonder he can't debate AR or the environement, he's a sham
troll....


  #42 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,uk.environment
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 14
Default Alan Conner, usenet Troll

On uk.environment, in > , "rick" wrote:

<article not downloaded:
http://slrn.sourceforge.net/docs/README.offline>

> Subject: Alan Conner, usenet Troll


Nope. I post under a single, unique alias. Anyone who doesn't
like my style can killfile me and I'm gone.

(And many people have, believe me. I respect their right to do
so.)

But you won't do that, because YOU are a troll. You think you can
force me to read your articles and that I have a moral obligation
to do so.

Guess again.

And people can't killfile YOU because YOU will just scuttle off
and hide behind another alias.

But _I_ have gagfiled you (I only bring down your headers) and
you _will_ stay in my gagfile.

Note: I won't be downloading any articles on this thread.

Alan

--
See my headers.
  #43 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,uk.environment
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 315
Default Alan Conner, usenet Troll


"Alan Connor" > wrote in message
...
> On uk.environment, in
> > , "rick"
> wrote:
>
> <article not downloaded:
> http://slrn.sourceforge.net/docs/README.offline>
>
>> Subject: Alan Conner, usenet Troll

>
> Nope. I post under a single, unique alias. Anyone who doesn't
> like my style can killfile me and I'm gone.
>
> (And many people have, believe me. I respect their right to do
> so.)
>
> But you won't do that, because YOU are a troll. You think you
> can
> force me to read your articles and that I have a moral
> obligation
> to do so.

===========================
ROTFLMAO I'm 'forcing' you to read posts? You really are that
stupid, aren't you?
And troll, you are reading my posts. Of course you're only
replying to these posts because you cannot refute what I say
about you ignorance about AR/envirionment/veg*nism. Come on back
little boy when you can talk with the big people.


>
> Guess again.
>
> And people can't killfile YOU because YOU will just scuttle off
> and hide behind another alias.
>
> But _I_ have gagfiled you (I only bring down your headers) and
> you _will_ stay in my gagfile.
>
> Note: I won't be downloading any articles on this thread.
> =====================

Run away like a good little troll....


> Alan
>
> --
> See my headers.



  #44 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,uk.environment
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,652
Default What If...We All Became Vegan?

On Sat, 05 Aug 2006 18:31:47 GMT, Alan Connor > wrote:

>On Sat, 05 Aug 2006 18:03:00 GMT, "rick" > wrote:


>>Remember, most places in
>>the world don't use the garin-fed model that the US/Canada does.
>>That just started after WWII as a result of excess grain
>>production and as a way to keep grain farmers in business.

>. . .
>
>>How much labor does it take for venison?
>>Grass-fed beef?
>>Chickens that roam the back yard? Grain production is a very
>>intensive process that invovles inputs from the petro-chemical
>>industry at every step of the way. But then, don't let the facts
>>get in the way of a good brainwashing, eh fool?

>
>Not interested in the opinions of dishonest cowards who post
>under multiple aliases.


No he doesn't post under multiple aliases. He posts regularly,
and his posts point out absurdities and dishonesties promoted
by you "aras". He posts information that you hate, because it
suggests some options could be ethically equivalent or superior
to your elimination objective. The truth is the enemy of "ar" in
many/most cases, so the truth causes great cognitive dissonance
in your brain which is very uncomfortable for you. You then lash
out in desperate ways trying to make it go away any way you can,
but you can't so you debase yourself by resorting to childish insults
and making absurdly pointless dishonest claims, etc. The plain
truth has reduced you to a frantic, desperate wreck, striking out
at the messenger who presented these aspects of reality which
are causing your incredible mental anguish. It won't ever go away,
but you can never accept the truth as long as you maintain faith
that veganism is the most ethically superior approach people could
take. You must maintain that extreme position regardless of anything,
or consider that in some cases it's okay for humans to raise and kill
animals for food.
  #45 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,uk.environment
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 14
Default What If...We All Became Vegan?

On uk.environment, in >, "dh@." wrote:

<article not downloaded:
http://slrn.sourceforge.net/docs/README.offline>

Yep. You're a troll. You just can't believe that someone isn't
interested in your opinions.

Here's a clue for you: Any ignorant and malicious child with
their mommy's computer and credit card can post anything on the
Usenet under multiple aliases through different newsservers.

If you don't have the honesty and courage to post under a single,
unique alias, you have ZERO credibility.

With anyone who isn't dumb as a brick.

How many times do I have to tell you this?

No. There isn't anything you could possibly post that could harm me in any way.

Dishonest cowards like you have threat ratings significantly
below zero.

So low that I don't even _have_ to read your articles.

Alan

--
See my headers.


  #46 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,uk.environment
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 315
Default Spammer alert... Alan Conner....


"Alan Connor" > wrote in message
...


You're a troll. You just can't believe that someone isn't


Alan conner is dumb as a brick, and has ZERO credibility.


How many times do I have to tell you this?


snip spew...


  #47 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,uk.environment
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,652
Default What If...We All Became Vegan?

On Mon, 07 Aug 2006 00:49:08 GMT, Alan Connor > wrote:

>I don't even _have_ to read your articles.


The truth hurts you, but you did read it.
  #48 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,sci.environment,uk.environment,alt.global-warming
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,652
Default What If...We All Became Vegan?

On Sat, 5 Aug 2006 10:34:14 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:

>
><dh@.> wrote in message ...
>> On Fri, 4 Aug 2006 22:10:56 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
>>
>>>
>>><dh@.> wrote in message ...
>>>> On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 23:00:48 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>><dh@.> wrote in message
om...
>>>>>> On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 10:46:49 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>><dh@.> wrote
>>>>>>>> On Fri, 28 Jul 2006 20:01:00 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>His argument fails for the following reason: If there is such a
>>>>>>>>>state
>>>>>>>>>as
>>>>>>>>>a
>>>>>>>>>pre-existent soul,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That's not my argument...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Then your plea on behalf animals that would_have_been born refers to
>>>>>>>nothing
>>>>>>>real.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>then we have no knowledge whether or not that state is
>>>>>>>>>superior to life as we know it, particularly as a farm animal.
>>>>>>>>>Mythology
>>>>>>>>>would suggest that such states are actually blissful compared to
>>>>>>>>>earthly
>>>>>>>>>coil.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ...but it certainly was Goo's:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "EVEN WITH the very best animal welfare conditions one might
>>>>>>>> provide:
>>>>>>>> they STILL might not be as good as the "pre-existence" state was for
>>>>>>>> the animals" - Goo
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>He is correct, if "pre-existence" exists (?) it is undefinable.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But the Goober *now* claims to know that:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Coming into existence is not a benefit for any animal" - Goo
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How do you think your hero found out that which is undefinable?
>>>>>
>>>>>You *cannot* say it's a "benefit"
>>>>
>>>> I can if I can feel that some beings benefit from existing, which I
>>>> can but you goos cannot.
>>>
>>>We're talking about "coming into existence",

>>
>> You want to limit any consideration to that,

>
>No, I am preventing you from getting away with equivocating between
>"existence" and "coming into existence".
>
>> even though you
>> admittedly don't know what the consideration is.

>
>I know what the dictionary definition of consideration is, I am requiring
>that you define rigorously exactly what and in what fashion you are
>demanding we "consider" instead of wildly equivocating between consideration
>of "existence" and "coming into existence".
>
>>>not existing.

>>
>> I consider their lives, and you admittedly can not.

>
>Describe that process of consideration in detail, and I don't mean quote the
>dictionary.


Think about what the animals lives are like, and consider whether
or not we believe the experiences they have would be more likely
to give life a positive or a negative value to them. There's more to it,
but that much alone is more than you will ever be able to appreciate
or even acknowledge.
  #49 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,sci.environment,uk.environment,alt.global-warming
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,652
Default What If...We All Became Vegan?

On 5 Aug 2006 09:26:32 -0700, wrote:

>
>dh@. wrote:
>> On 4 Aug 2006 06:56:02 -0700,
wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >rick wrote:
>> >> > wrote in message
>> >> oups.com...
>> >> >
>> >> > rick wrote:
>> >> >> > wrote in message
>> >> >> ups.com...
>> >> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> snip...
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > So, what on earth did you have in mind when you said "a far
>> >> >> > more brutal
>> >> >> > and inhumane death than any slaughterhouse animal endures"
>> >> >> > ??
>> >> >> > WHat
>> >> >> > could be more brutal and inhumane than the life and death of
>> >> >> > a
>> >> >> > e.g. a
>> >> >> > southeast asian bird raised in a western texas goulag?

>>
>> We know that you're trying to encourage this sort of image when
>> people think of chicken farming:
>>
>>
http://tinyurl.com/zknxw
>>
>> but this is reality:
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/er56m
>>

>
>Thanks for the pics! The second one (as you point out) is clearly the
>reality of most chicken farming today, and certainly much uglier.


No it's not, and we both know it. Even though you won't admit it,
we both know it would be much worse if the birds feared for their
lives as your Chicken Run impression dishonsestly suggests they do.

>Disgusting.


Your dishonesty is what's disgusting, not a house full of birds eating,
drinking, and lounging about.

>> which is nothing like the dishonest distortion of reality your Kafkaesque
>> fairytale image was intended to create. The question is always ever
>> present when "discussing" animal farming with "aras":
>>
>> Why do you lie?
>>

>
>Sorry, I'm not following.. what point of mine do you dissagree with?


First it was your original attempt to create the dishonest impression
that chicken farming is like the Chicken Run image, and now it's
still that (even though you've somewhat admitted to the original
dishonesty you will never fully admit much less apologise for it)
plus your dishonest insistence that reality is much uglier than your
original attempt at dishonesty.

>> >> >> >==================
>> >> >> Still having a comprehension problem, eh?
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Apparently so, but your reply somehow didn't help.
>> >> ====================
>> >> It was quite clear. That you wish to remain terminally ignorant
>> >> is obvious.
>> >>
>> >
>> >Thanks for beginning your message with obvious falsehoods, to warn me
>> >that you didn't have anything to say.

>>
>> He did have something to say, and you gave the clear impression
>> that you didn't know what he had in mind: "what on earth did you
>> have in mind".
>>

>
>He did finally tell me.. it was the poisoning of animals by
>insecticides used to raise monocrops.


Did he fail to point out the crushing, and suffocating, and being shredded,
and dis-membered, and being exposed to and eaten by predators, and having
entire habitats destroyed, etc?

>In my opinion, that is not much
>more gruesome than e.g. your pic#2 of the asian-american boilers..


It sure is to some of us, myself included.

>but
>I apologize for encouraging this "which is morally worse" kind of
>discussion that won't go anywhere.


I'm really surprised you could get even this far thinking about it.
Usually veg*n/"ar" types try to deny it entirely, and/or change the
subject in various ways in their attempts to crawl away from their
own contributions to the deaths that everyone contributes to.

>> >> > Again, you said something about "far more brutal and inhumane
>> >> > deaths"
>> >> > [as caused by the vegetarian you were arguing with]..
>> >> >
>> >> > Personally I don't put a lot of weight this kind of moral
>> >> > analysis of
>> >> > foodstuffs, but I guess I do care enough to be curious what you
>> >> > had in
>> >> > mind.
>> >> >
>> >> > Did you have anything in mind? A prairie dog in a combine
>> >> > harvester
>> >> > isn't pretty but at least the thing got to see a blue sky and
>> >> > meet its
>> >> > mother.
>> >> ================================
>> >> So do all beef cattle, fool. But at the end of the day, they die
>> >> a quick death with a bolt to the brain, not by being shredded,
>> >> sliced, diced, dis-membered or poisoned. Have you seen an animal
>> >> die from poisoning? How is having your guts turn to mush over a
>> >> few days less cruel than a bolt to the brain?
>> >>
>> >
>> >E.g., I'd rather live a happy life and spend a week in agony at the end
>> >then live my entire life in agony with a quick end.

>>
>> An entire life in agony hasn't been discussed. Beef cattle spend most
>> of their lives grazing in pastures--much of it with their mothers--and then
>> get to spend the last few months gorging on grain in feel lots. The people
>> I've talked to who have actually been around feed lots say the animals
>> love it, so you're lying about an "entire life in agony"...in fact so far we
>> have examples of none at all. So now the question has arisen AGAIN!
>> as it always seems to do with you "aras":
>>
>> Why did you lie this time?
>>

>
>What was my lie? I hadn't even brought up beef.


But you were responding to the issue of raising beef by dishonestly
suggesting life for beef cattle is an "entire life in agony with a quick end."

>> >> Perhaps you are thinking of the elimination of habitable land
>> >> > and thus species extinction by agriculture? Or something else?
>> >> =========================
>> >> Mono-culture crop production is the definition of habitat
>> >> destruction, fool. But then, you've never let reality get in the
>> >> way of a good brainwashing, have you killer?
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >THat was my point.

>>
>> · From the life and death of a thousand pound grass raised
>> steer and whatever he happens to kill during his life, people
>> get over 500 pounds of human consumable meat...that's well
>> over 500 servings of meat. From a grass raised dairy cow people
>> get thousands of dairy servings. Due to the influence of farm
>> machinery, and *icides, and in the case of rice the flooding and
>> draining of fields, one serving of soy or rice based product is
>> likely to involve more animal deaths than hundreds of servings
>> derived from grass raised animals. Grass raised animal products
>> contribute to fewer wildlife deaths, better wildlife habitat, and
>> better lives for livestock than soy or rice products. ·
>>
>> Here we see plowing:
>> http://tinyurl.com/8fmxe
>>
>> and here harrowing:
>> http://tinyurl.com/zqr2v
>>
>> both of which kill animals by crushing, mutilation, suffocation,
>> and exposing them to predators. We can see that planting
>> kills in similar ways:
>> http://tinyurl.com/k6sku
>>
>> and death from herbicides and pesticides needs to be
>> kept in mind:
>> http://tinyurl.com/ew2j5
>>
>> Harvesting kills of course by crushing and mutilation, and
>> it also removes the surviving animals' food, and it exposes
>> them to predators:
>> http://tinyurl.com/otp5l
>>
>> In the case of rice there's additional killing as well caused
>> by flooding:
>> http://tinyurl.com/qhqx3
>>
>> and later by draining and destroying the environment which
>> developed as the result of the flooding:
>> http://tinyurl.com/rc9m3
>>
>> Cattle eating grass rarely if ever cause anywhere near
>> as much suffering and death. ·
>> http://tinyurl.com/q7whm
>>
>> >But then, you'd never agree with someone in this
>> >forum, would you killer.

>>
>> Would you, killer?

>
>Certainly would! I know e.g. a few hundred black angus in VT that are
>environmentally and morally vastly superior foodstuffs to most any
>large-scale veggies for exactly the reasons you point out.


It's very unusual to see any sort of veg*n admit that...in fact it's a
first for me. Maybe I should keep it as an example for when later
you decide to disagree with yourself about it.

>When my own
>health and taste is also a factor however I prefer equally low
>footprint small farm veggies.
>
>Thanks - shevek

  #50 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,sci.environment,uk.environment,alt.global-warming
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,652
Default What If...We All Became Vegan?

On Sat, 5 Aug 2006 20:10:48 +0100, "pearl" > wrote:

>
>Cornell Ph.D. student works the land by hand at Bison Ridge
>Farming in harmony with nature
>
>By Lauren Cahoon
>Special to The Journal
>August 4, 2006
>

.. . .

>we brought them some of our lettuce and they went crazy over it
>.... our lettuce just knocked them over, it's so good."


Very hard to believe.


  #51 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,sci.environment,uk.environment,alt.global-warming
z z is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13
Default What If...We All Became Vegan?


Dave wrote:
> Dutch wrote:
>
> >
> > > 3) If you are going to get philosophical about the nature of life then you
> > > need to show you have researched the subject. The very fact that you
> > > assume a pre-destined soul awaiting transference into a body, assumes that
> > > there are far more souls awaiting the growth of the animal population in
> > > future. You are thus saying that the meat industry is being altruistic in
> > > its creation of physical life in order to provide a shell which a "lost
> > > soul" can occupy; in which case I cry for those souls of people waiting
> > > for bodies to enter who may not gain the shell they crave if we do not
> > > increase the human population to - how many lost souls are there Dave? You
> > > must tell us.

> >
> > His argument fails for the following reason: If there is such a state as a
> > pre-existent soul, then we have no knowledge whether or not that state is
> > superior to life as we know it, particularly as a farm animal. Mythology
> > would suggest that such states are actually blissful compared to earthly
> > coil. In reality in my view no such state exists, therefore coming into
> > existence also cannot be seen as a benefit.

>
> "If there is such a state as a post-existent soul, then we have no
> knowledge
> whether or not that stae is superior ro life as we know it. If no such
> state exists
> and coming into existence can not be seen as a benefit than being taken
> out of existence can not be seen as a harm." The reason I disagree with
> DH
> is that he acts as if we provide the resources that enable animals to
> live when
> actually the resources are provided by nature and all we do is allocate
> them
> based on selfish considerations like meat and gravy.


Life is hard. It would be better never to exist. But how many people
are that lucky? Barely 1 in 10.

  #52 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,sci.environment,uk.environment,alt.global-warming
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,028
Default What If...We All Became Vegan?


<dh@.> wrote
> On Sat, 5 Aug 2006 10:34:14 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:


[..]

>>I know what the dictionary definition of consideration is, I am requiring
>>that you define rigorously exactly what and in what fashion you are
>>demanding we "consider" instead of wildly equivocating between
>>consideration
>>of "existence" and "coming into existence".
>>
>>>>not existing.
>>>
>>> I consider their lives, and you admittedly can not.

>>
>>Describe that process of consideration in detail, and I don't mean quote
>>the
>>dictionary.

>
> Think about what the animals lives are like, and consider whether
> or not we believe the experiences they have would be more likely
> to give life a positive or a negative value to them.


That is one meaning of "life", considering the quality of their lives, aka
AW, it doesn't imply the LoL.

> There's more to it,
> but that much alone is more than you will ever be able to appreciate
> or even acknowledge.


The "more" you are referring to is when you equivocate between that meaning
of "life" and the other in order to promote the LoL.


  #53 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,sci.environment,uk.environment,alt.global-warming
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,652
Default What If...We All Became Vegan?

On 10 Aug 2006 13:46:30 -0700, "z" > wrote:

>
>Dave wrote:
>> Dutch wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > > 3) If you are going to get philosophical about the nature of life then you
>> > > need to show you have researched the subject. The very fact that you
>> > > assume a pre-destined soul awaiting transference into a body, assumes that
>> > > there are far more souls awaiting the growth of the animal population in
>> > > future. You are thus saying that the meat industry is being altruistic in
>> > > its creation of physical life in order to provide a shell which a "lost
>> > > soul" can occupy; in which case I cry for those souls of people waiting
>> > > for bodies to enter who may not gain the shell they crave if we do not
>> > > increase the human population to - how many lost souls are there Dave? You
>> > > must tell us.
>> >
>> > His argument fails for the following reason: If there is such a state as a
>> > pre-existent soul, then we have no knowledge whether or not that state is
>> > superior to life as we know it, particularly as a farm animal. Mythology
>> > would suggest that such states are actually blissful compared to earthly
>> > coil. In reality in my view no such state exists, therefore coming into
>> > existence also cannot be seen as a benefit.

>>
>> "If there is such a state as a post-existent soul, then we have no
>> knowledge
>> whether or not that stae is superior ro life as we know it. If no such
>> state exists
>> and coming into existence can not be seen as a benefit than being taken
>> out of existence can not be seen as a harm." The reason I disagree with
>> DH
>> is that he acts as if we provide the resources that enable animals to
>> live when
>> actually the resources are provided by nature and all we do is allocate
>> them
>> based on selfish considerations like meat and gravy.

>
>Life is hard. It would be better never to exist. But how many people
>are that lucky? Barely 1 in 10.


LOL!
  #54 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,sci.environment,uk.environment,alt.global-warming
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,652
Default What If...We All Became Vegan?

On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 15:20:44 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:

>
><dh@.> wrote
>> On Sat, 5 Aug 2006 10:34:14 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:

>
>[..]
>
>>>I know what the dictionary definition of consideration is, I am requiring
>>>that you define rigorously exactly what and in what fashion you are
>>>demanding we "consider" instead of wildly equivocating between
>>>consideration
>>>of "existence" and "coming into existence".
>>>
>>>>>not existing.
>>>>
>>>> I consider their lives, and you admittedly can not.
>>>
>>>Describe that process of consideration in detail, and I don't mean quote
>>>the
>>>dictionary.

>>
>> Think about what the animals lives are like, and consider whether
>> or not we believe the experiences they have would be more likely
>> to give life a positive or a negative value to them.

>
>That is one meaning of "life", considering the quality of their lives, aka
>AW,


So do you only have trouble understanding the other meaning that
I've pointed out to you?

>it doesn't imply the LoL.


The LoL requires it. There's more to it, but that much alone is more
than you'll ever be able to appreciate or be honest enough to acknowledge.
  #55 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,sci.environment,uk.environment,alt.global-warming
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,028
Default What If...We All Became Vegan?


<dh@.> wrote in message ...
> On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 15:20:44 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
>
>>
>><dh@.> wrote
>>> On Sat, 5 Aug 2006 10:34:14 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:

>>
>>[..]
>>
>>>>I know what the dictionary definition of consideration is, I am
>>>>requiring
>>>>that you define rigorously exactly what and in what fashion you are
>>>>demanding we "consider" instead of wildly equivocating between
>>>>consideration
>>>>of "existence" and "coming into existence".
>>>>
>>>>>>not existing.
>>>>>
>>>>> I consider their lives, and you admittedly can not.
>>>>
>>>>Describe that process of consideration in detail, and I don't mean quote
>>>>the
>>>>dictionary.
>>>
>>> Think about what the animals lives are like, and consider whether
>>> or not we believe the experiences they have would be more likely
>>> to give life a positive or a negative value to them.

>>
>>That is one meaning of "life", considering the quality of their lives, aka
>>AW,

>
> So do you only have trouble understanding the other meaning that
> I've pointed out to you?


I have no trouble understanding the meanings of the word life, and I have no
trouble seeing you equivocate among them.

>>it doesn't imply the LoL.

>
> The LoL requires it. There's more to it, but that much alone is more
> than you'll ever be able to appreciate or be honest enough to acknowledge.


The LoL requires that you look at the lives of lifestock and use those lives
as a justification for killing them. It's an inadmissable circular
sophistry, which I have explained *again* today.




  #56 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,sci.environment,uk.environment,alt.global-warming
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,652
Default What If...We All Became Vegan?

On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 11:32:45 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:

>
><dh@.> wrote in message ...
>> On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 15:20:44 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
>>
>>>
>>><dh@.> wrote
>>>> On Sat, 5 Aug 2006 10:34:14 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
>>>
>>>[..]
>>>
>>>>>I know what the dictionary definition of consideration is, I am
>>>>>requiring
>>>>>that you define rigorously exactly what and in what fashion you are
>>>>>demanding we "consider" instead of wildly equivocating between
>>>>>consideration
>>>>>of "existence" and "coming into existence".
>>>>>
>>>>>>>not existing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I consider their lives, and you admittedly can not.
>>>>>
>>>>>Describe that process of consideration in detail, and I don't mean quote
>>>>>the
>>>>>dictionary.
>>>>
>>>> Think about what the animals lives are like, and consider whether
>>>> or not we believe the experiences they have would be more likely
>>>> to give life a positive or a negative value to them.
>>>
>>>That is one meaning of "life", considering the quality of their lives, aka
>>>AW,

>>
>> So do you only have trouble understanding the other meaning that
>> I've pointed out to you?

>
>I have no trouble understanding the meanings of the word life,


You can only understand one.

>and I have no trouble seeing you equivocate among them.


You're only aware of one.

> >>it doesn't imply the LoL.

>>
>> The LoL requires it. There's more to it, but that much alone is more
>> than you'll ever be able to appreciate or be honest enough to acknowledge.

>
>The LoL requires that you look at the lives of lifestock


and also that "their life is a fairly happy one." - Salt

That much alone is more than you'll ever be able to appreciate or be
honest enough to acknowledge, as I have already correctly pointed out.
  #57 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,sci.environment,uk.environment,alt.global-warming
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,028
Default What If...We All Became Vegan?


<dh@.> wrote in message ...
> On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 11:32:45 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
>
>>
>><dh@.> wrote in message ...
>>> On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 15:20:44 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>><dh@.> wrote
>>>>> On Sat, 5 Aug 2006 10:34:14 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>[..]
>>>>
>>>>>>I know what the dictionary definition of consideration is, I am
>>>>>>requiring
>>>>>>that you define rigorously exactly what and in what fashion you are
>>>>>>demanding we "consider" instead of wildly equivocating between
>>>>>>consideration
>>>>>>of "existence" and "coming into existence".
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>not existing.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I consider their lives, and you admittedly can not.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Describe that process of consideration in detail, and I don't mean
>>>>>>quote
>>>>>>the
>>>>>>dictionary.
>>>>>
>>>>> Think about what the animals lives are like, and consider whether
>>>>> or not we believe the experiences they have would be more likely
>>>>> to give life a positive or a negative value to them.
>>>>
>>>>That is one meaning of "life", considering the quality of their lives,
>>>>aka
>>>>AW,
>>>
>>> So do you only have trouble understanding the other meaning that
>>> I've pointed out to you?

>>
>>I have no trouble understanding the meanings of the word life,

>
> You can only understand one.


Nope, I know the two that you equivocate on constantly. You equivocate
between life itself, existence, and the series of (positive or negative)
experiences that one has during that life.

>>and I have no trouble seeing you equivocate among them.

>
> You're only aware of one.


You're pounding sand ****wit.

>> >>it doesn't imply the LoL.
>>>
>>> The LoL requires it. There's more to it, but that much alone is more
>>> than you'll ever be able to appreciate or be honest enough to
>>> acknowledge.

>>
>>The LoL requires that you look at the lives of lifestock

>
> and also that "their life is a fairly happy one." - Salt
>
> That much alone is more than you'll ever be able to appreciate or be
> honest enough to acknowledge, as I have already correctly pointed out.


You don't know if the lives of the animals you eat are "fairly happy" or
not. How can you base your philosophy on something you give no definition
for and have no knowledge of?



  #58 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,sci.environment,uk.environment,alt.global-warming
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 35
Default What If...We All Became Vegan?


dh@. wrote:
> On 5 Aug 2006 09:26:32 -0700, wrote:
>
> >
> >dh@. wrote:
> >> On 4 Aug 2006 06:56:02 -0700,
wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >rick wrote:
> >> >> > wrote in message
> >> >> oups.com...
> >> >> >
> >> >> > rick wrote:
> >> >> >> > wrote in message
> >> >> >> ups.com...
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> snip...
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > So, what on earth did you have in mind when you said "a far
> >> >> >> > more brutal
> >> >> >> > and inhumane death than any slaughterhouse animal endures"
> >> >> >> > ??
> >> >> >> > WHat
> >> >> >> > could be more brutal and inhumane than the life and death of
> >> >> >> > a
> >> >> >> > e.g. a
> >> >> >> > southeast asian bird raised in a western texas goulag?
> >>
> >> We know that you're trying to encourage this sort of image when
> >> people think of chicken farming:
> >>
> >>
http://tinyurl.com/zknxw
> >>
> >> but this is reality:
> >>
> >> http://tinyurl.com/er56m
> >>

> >
> >Thanks for the pics! The second one (as you point out) is clearly the
> >reality of most chicken farming today, and certainly much uglier.

>
> No it's not, and we both know it. Even though you won't admit it,
> we both know it would be much worse if the birds feared for their
> lives as your Chicken Run impression dishonsestly suggests they do.
>


Sorry if I didn't make myself clear. I was saying I -don't- think it's
like the Chicken Run photo you pointed us to.

> >Disgusting.

>
> Your dishonesty is what's disgusting, not a house full of birds eating,
> drinking, and lounging about.
>


Really? You think a house full of birds, as in thousands of them,
isn't disgusting? I dare you to spend an hour in there without a gas
mask. The salaries of the employees refelect the fact that it is
-very- disgusting.

Would you think that a thousand dogs in a house lounging about was also
not disgusting?


> >> which is nothing like the dishonest distortion of reality your Kafkaesque
> >> fairytale image was intended to create. The question is always ever
> >> present when "discussing" animal farming with "aras":
> >>
> >> Why do you lie?
> >>

> >
> >Sorry, I'm not following.. what point of mine do you dissagree with?

>
> First it was your original attempt to create the dishonest impression
> that chicken farming is like the Chicken Run image, and now it's
> still that (even though you've somewhat admitted to the original
> dishonesty you will never fully admit much less apologise for it)
> plus your dishonest insistence that reality is much uglier than your
> original attempt at dishonesty.
>


I think you misunderstood. I said that the other image you sent was
far more accurate than the chicken run image.

> >> >> >> >==================
> >> >> >> Still having a comprehension problem, eh?
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Apparently so, but your reply somehow didn't help.
> >> >> ====================
> >> >> It was quite clear. That you wish to remain terminally ignorant
> >> >> is obvious.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >Thanks for beginning your message with obvious falsehoods, to warn me
> >> >that you didn't have anything to say.
> >>
> >> He did have something to say, and you gave the clear impression
> >> that you didn't know what he had in mind: "what on earth did you
> >> have in mind".
> >>

> >
> >He did finally tell me.. it was the poisoning of animals by
> >insecticides used to raise monocrops.

>
> Did he fail to point out the crushing, and suffocating, and being shredded,
> and dis-membered, and being exposed to and eaten by predators, and having
> entire habitats destroyed, etc?
>


The destruction of habitats is perhaps the most disgusting of all these
terrible things discussed now in this thread. However, I don't think
he was referring to 'habitat' when he said "a far more brutal and
inhumane death".

> >In my opinion, that is not much
> >more gruesome than e.g. your pic#2 of the asian-american boilers..

>
> It sure is to some of us, myself included.
>


Well no accounting for taste. Or perhaps there is some accounting
possible, but at any rate I should drop the argument at this point.


> >but
> >I apologize for encouraging this "which is morally worse" kind of
> >discussion that won't go anywhere.

>
> I'm really surprised you could get even this far thinking about it.
> Usually veg*n/"ar" types try to deny it entirely, and/or change the
> subject in various ways in their attempts to crawl away from their
> own contributions to the deaths that everyone contributes to.
>


I understand that I contribute to deaths.. by using streets, cars,
electric power, etc. I entirely agree with you that a 'holier than
thou' attitude based solely on the one fact of less animal protein in
the diet is untenable. I also have no problem with cutting the head
off a bird, as long as I don't have to go near one of those "houses
full of birds lounging around". Certainly there are far more things to
look at in voting with your dollar (choosing foods) than only animal
vs. plant. I'm very glad to see this point brought up a lot in this
forum.

Seriously, take a trip down through Arizona and southern NM to El Paso
Texas (Boiler territory) and tell me what you think of the smell down
there. No need to get closer than a few miles from the "house".

You do seem smart enough to practice your animal sacrifice rituals in a
more appealing manner, such as allowing birds to grow up with their
parents or perhaps even see the light of day. If so, I'd be happy to
help you pluck stuff and eat. Bon appetit.

[..]
> >> Would you, killer?

> >
> >Certainly would! I know e.g. a few hundred black angus in VT that are
> >environmentally and morally vastly superior foodstuffs to most any
> >large-scale veggies for exactly the reasons you point out.

>
> It's very unusual to see any sort of veg*n admit that...in fact it's a
> first for me. Maybe I should keep it as an example for when later
> you decide to disagree with yourself about it.
>


I'm not a very good veg*n.. I'm entirely vegetarian except when I'm
eating meat.

Thanks - shevek

  #59 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,sci.environment,uk.environment,alt.global-warming
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,652
Default What If...We All Became Vegan?

On Sun, 13 Aug 2006 21:48:15 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:

>
><dh@.> wrote in message ...
>> On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 11:32:45 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
>>
>>>The LoL requires that you look at the lives of lifestock

>>
>> and also that "their life is a fairly happy one." - Salt
>>
>> That much alone is more than you'll ever be able to appreciate or be
>> honest enough to acknowledge, as I have already correctly pointed out.

>
>You don't know if the lives of the animals you eat are "fairly happy" or
>not. How can you base your philosophy on something you give no definition
>for and have no knowledge of?


It couldn't matter to you, because it could have no significance to you
regardless of why it does to anyone else. You're pretending to try to think
about an aspect of the situation that admittedly could never have any meaning
to you. Not only can you not appreciate it, but you don't think anyone should
ever even bring it up....not Salt....not me...no one. So why do you try to pretend
that you have some interest in a subject that you're maniacally opposed to
seeing anyone even mention?
  #60 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,sci.environment,uk.environment,alt.global-warming
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,652
Default What If...We All Became Vegan?

On 15 Aug 2006 07:36:12 -0700, wrote:

>
>dh@. wrote:
>> On 5 Aug 2006 09:26:32 -0700,
wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >dh@. wrote:
>> >> On 4 Aug 2006 06:56:02 -0700,
wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >rick wrote:
>> >> >> > wrote in message
>> >> >> oups.com...
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > rick wrote:
>> >> >> >> > wrote in message
>> >> >> >> ups.com...
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> snip...
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > So, what on earth did you have in mind when you said "a far
>> >> >> >> > more brutal
>> >> >> >> > and inhumane death than any slaughterhouse animal endures"
>> >> >> >> > ??
>> >> >> >> > WHat
>> >> >> >> > could be more brutal and inhumane than the life and death of
>> >> >> >> > a
>> >> >> >> > e.g. a
>> >> >> >> > southeast asian bird raised in a western texas goulag?
>> >>
>> >> We know that you're trying to encourage this sort of image when
>> >> people think of chicken farming:
>> >>
>> >>
http://tinyurl.com/zknxw
>> >>
>> >> but this is reality:
>> >>
>> >> http://tinyurl.com/er56m
>> >>
>> >
>> >Thanks for the pics! The second one (as you point out) is clearly the
>> >reality of most chicken farming today, and certainly much uglier.

>>
>> No it's not, and we both know it. Even though you won't admit it,
>> we both know it would be much worse if the birds feared for their
>> lives as your Chicken Run impression dishonsestly suggests they do.
>>

>
>Sorry if I didn't make myself clear. I was saying I -don't- think it's
>like the Chicken Run photo you pointed us to.


I'm aware of that. You said reality is certainly much uglier than
if the birds feared for their lives as your Chicken Run impression
dishonsestly suggests they do

>> >Disgusting.

>>
>> Your dishonesty is what's disgusting, not a house full of birds eating,
>> drinking, and lounging about.
>>

>
>Really?


Your dishonesty is really disgusting to me.

>You think a house full of birds, as in thousands of them,
>isn't disgusting?


Not necessarily. Sometimes it is. Sometimes it's not. I've been in broiler
houses and wished I could provide something that nice for my own birds.
I'm guessing you've never had a similar experience.

>I dare you to spend an hour in there without a gas mask.


Why?

>The salaries of the employees refelect the fact that it is
>-very- disgusting.
>
>Would you think that a thousand dogs in a house lounging about was also
>not disgusting?


I doubt it, but it would be for reasons you could probably never figure out
much less appreciate.

.. . .

>> Did he fail to point out the crushing, and suffocating, and being shredded,
>> and dis-membered, and being exposed to and eaten by predators, and having
>> entire habitats destroyed, etc?
>>

>
>The destruction of habitats is perhaps the most disgusting of all these
>terrible things discussed now in this thread. However, I don't think
>he was referring to 'habitat' when he said "a far more brutal and
>inhumane death".


That's because you can't--or won't--put it all together. Haven't you noticed
that he keeps telling you people that over and over again, killer?

>> >In my opinion, that is not much
>> >more gruesome than e.g. your pic#2 of the asian-american boilers..

>>
>> It sure is to some of us, myself included.
>>

>
>Well no accounting for taste. Or perhaps there is some accounting
>possible,


I consider it to be very significant that the animals we raise for food,
do NOT know they will be killed and eaten as Salt's Logic of the Talking
"ar" Pig and Chicken Run dishonestly encourage people to believe they do.

>but at any rate I should drop the argument at this point.



  #61 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,sci.environment,uk.environment,alt.global-warming
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 86
Default What If...We All Became Vegan?

****wit David Harrison, *clueless* ignorant lying pig-sodomizing goober
cracker, lied:
> On Sun, 13 Aug 2006 21:48:15 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
>
> >
> >****wit David Harrison, *clueless* ignorant lying pig-sodomizing goober cracker, lied
> >> On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 11:32:45 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
> >>
> >>>The LoL requires that you look at the lives of lifestock
> >>
> >> and also that "their life is a fairly happy one." - Salt
> >>
> >> That much alone is more than you'll ever be able to appreciate or be
> >> honest enough to acknowledge, as I have already correctly pointed out.

> >
> >You don't know if the lives of the animals you eat are "fairly happy" or
> >not.


****wit doesn't care. To him, "getting to experience life" is the
greatest conceivable benefit, and it outweighs *any* bad welfare an
animal might experience.

> > How can you base your philosophy on something you give no definition
> >for and have no knowledge of?

>
> It couldn't matter to you,


It does matter, ****wit. Your basing of your "philosophy" - Dutch was
being too generous - on something that you cannot possibly know is
completely irrational and stupid. Since you advocate that others make
the same illogical choice, it matters.


> because it could have no significance to you
> regardless of why it does to anyone else.


It cannot have any significance to *any* rational person.

  #62 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,sci.environment,uk.environment,alt.global-warming
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,028
Default What If...We All Became Vegan?


<dh@.> wrote in message ...
> On Sun, 13 Aug 2006 21:48:15 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
>
>>
>><dh@.> wrote in message ...
>>> On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 11:32:45 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
>>>
>>>>The LoL requires that you look at the lives of lifestock
>>>
>>> and also that "their life is a fairly happy one." - Salt
>>>
>>> That much alone is more than you'll ever be able to appreciate or be
>>> honest enough to acknowledge, as I have already correctly pointed out.

>>
>>You don't know if the lives of the animals you eat are "fairly happy" or
>>not. How can you base your philosophy on something you give no definition
>>for and have no knowledge of?

>
> It couldn't matter to you, because it could have no significance to you
> regardless of why it does to anyone else. You're pretending to try to
> think
> about an aspect of the situation that admittedly could never have any
> meaning
> to you. Not only can you not appreciate it, but you don't think anyone
> should
> ever even bring it up....not Salt....not me...no one. So why do you try to
> pretend
> that you have some interest in a subject that you're maniacally opposed to
> seeing anyone even mention?


Answer the question. How can you base your philosophy on something you give
no definition for and have no knowledge of?


  #63 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,sci.environment,uk.environment,alt.global-warming
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,028
Default What If...We All Became Vegan?

<dh@.> wrote
> I consider it to be very significant that the animals we raise for
> food,
> do NOT know they will be killed and eaten as Salt's Logic of the Talking
> "ar" Pig and Chicken Run dishonestly encourage people to believe they do.


Salt's essay on The Logic of the Larder does not imply that animals know
they are destined to be killed and eaten. The "talking pig" is an
allegorical tool intended to address the conscience and attitudes of the
reader/consumer.


  #64 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,uk.environment
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 14
Default What If...We All Became Vegan?

Crossposts reduced to Netiquette limit of three groups.

On uk.environment, in >, "Dutch" wrote:

Correction: Someone who _sometimes_ calls himself "Dutch" wrote:

<article not downloaded:
http://slrn.sourceforge.net/docs/README.offline>

> Subject: What If...We All Became Vegan?


alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian

Are you concerned about the mistreatment of animals?

Every single industry that's out there mining and farming and
manufacturing and shipping and retailing the stuff you consume is
destroying animal habitat.

Not only are they driving the animals that live in that habitat
away (onto the habitat of _other_ animals) or just killing
them, but those populations become extinct: They won't have any
offspring and there won't be any more of them on that habitat.

Concerns about factory farming are only a small part of the
animal cruelty picture.

That meat-eater needs about 3.5 acres of land just to grow the
food to feed the animals he/she eats.

Any idea how many animals _used_ to live on that 3.5 acres? Or
included it in their foraging/hunting range?

The same would apply to the land where the iron ore mine, coal
mine, and limestone quarry needed to just _begin_ the process
of making steel, which just _begins_ the process of making
a car are on.

Ad infinitum.

In an industrial society, _everyone_ is being cruel to animals.

It isn't just people who eat factory farmed animal products.

Alan

--
Challenge-Response Systems are the best garbage-mail blockers
in the world. Spammers and trolls can't beat them and you
don't need to be a geek to use them. A brief introduction:
http://home.earthlink.net/~alanconnor/cr.html
  #65 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,uk.environment
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,028
Default What If...We All Became Vegan?


"Alan Connor" > wrote in message
...
> Crossposts reduced to Netiquette limit of three groups.
>
> On uk.environment, in >, "Dutch" wrote:
>
> Correction: Someone who _sometimes_ calls himself "Dutch" wrote:
>
> <article not downloaded:
> http://slrn.sourceforge.net/docs/README.offline>
>
>> Subject: What If...We All Became Vegan?

>
> alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian
>
> Are you concerned about the mistreatment of animals?


Yes, you?

> Every single industry that's out there mining and farming and
> manufacturing and shipping and retailing the stuff you consume is
> destroying animal habitat.


True.

> Not only are they driving the animals that live in that habitat
> away (onto the habitat of _other_ animals) or just killing
> them, but those populations become extinct: They won't have any
> offspring and there won't be any more of them on that habitat.


True.
>
> Concerns about factory farming are only a small part of the
> animal cruelty picture.


True.
>
> That meat-eater needs about 3.5 acres of land just to grow the
> food to feed the animals he/she eats.


Probably true, but it's worth it.

> Any idea how many animals _used_ to live on that 3.5 acres? Or
> included it in their foraging/hunting range?


Plenty, any idea how many animal used to call that vast grain-field called
the western praires home?

> The same would apply to the land where the iron ore mine, coal
> mine, and limestone quarry needed to just _begin_ the process
> of making steel, which just _begins_ the process of making
> a car are on.
>
> Ad infinitum.
>
> In an industrial society, _everyone_ is being cruel to animals.
>
> It isn't just people who eat factory farmed animal products.


You make some excellent points.

> Alan
>
> --
> Challenge-Response Systems are the best garbage-mail blockers
> in the world. Spammers and trolls can't beat them and you
> don't need to be a geek to use them. A brief introduction:
> http://home.earthlink.net/~alanconnor/cr.html


You call that "don't need to be a geek to use them"?




  #66 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,uk.environment
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 14
Default [OT] Dutch (was: What If...We All Became Vegan?)

On uk.environment, in >, "Dutch" wrote:

Correction: Someone who _sometimes_ calls himself "Dutch" wrote:

> Path: text.usenetserver.com!atl-c01.usenetserver.com!news.usenetserver.com!news2.e uro.net!62.58.50.20.MISMATCH!nntpfeed.zonnet.nl!fe eder1.cambrium.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!sn-xt-ams-06!sn-xt-ams-08!sn-ams!sn-feed-ams-01!sn-post-ams-01!sn-post-sjc-01!supernews.com!news.supernews.com!not-for-mail
> From: "Dutch" >


http://groups.google.com/advanced_group_search
Dutch
Results 1 - 100 of 7,430 posts in the last year
1 Dutchcharts
3 alt.abortion
17 alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian
4 alt.atheism
4 alt.autos.studebaker
2 alt.fan.landrover
1 alt.food.vegan
1 alt.online-services.roadrunner
3 alt.sex
3 alt.sex.exhibitionism
2 alt.sex.first-time
1 alt.sex.masterbation
1 alt.sex.masturbation
1 alt.sex.movies
1 alt.sex.pictures
1 alt.sex.pictures.d
1 alt.sex.pictures.female
1 alt.sex.pictures.misc
1 alt.sex.teens
1 alt.sex.uncut
1 alt.sex.young-women.foroldermen
1 alt.sports.football.college.fla-gators
1 alt.sports.hockey.nhl.edm-oilers
13 alt.sports.hockey.nhl.vanc-canucks
1 comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
1 comp.unix.solaris
3 hr.rec.kladjenje
8 hr.rec.tv.satelitska
1 it.comp.hardware.overclock
1 microsoft.public.office.misc
1 microsoft.public.security.homeusers
1 nl.muziek
2 nl.muziek.festivals
3 nl.sport.autosport
2 nl.sport.duiken
1 pl.hum.tlumaczenia
4 rec.music.marketplace.vinyl
1 rec.pets.dogs.behavior
1 rec.travel.europe
1 sci.electronics.repair
1 talk.abortion
1 uk.business.agriculture

An average of 20+ posts a day with just _this_ alias.

Serious motormouth. And like all trolls, he never stops running
his mouth long enough to do any research or serious thinking, and
thus his comments are ignorant in the extreme.

That is not a natural posting history. That's a sockpuppet's
posting history.

> Newsgroups: alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,uk.en vironment
> Subject: What If...We All Became Vegan?
> Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2006 12:00:11 -0700
> Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com
> Message-ID: >
> References: . com> . net> .com> . net> . com> > . com> > .com> > > >
> X-Priority: 3
> X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
> X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869
> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869
> X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
> X-Complaints-To:
> Lines: 73
> Xref: usenetserver.com alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian:338215 alt.food.vegan:242089 uk.environment:187249
> X-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2006 15:00:56 EDT (text.usenetserver.com)


No posting IP. Whatta surprise.

<article not downloaded:
http://slrn.sourceforge.net/docs/README.offline>

If you don't have the integrity to post under a single, unique
alias, then I am not interested in what you have to say.

Because what you say cannot be trusted. You can say anything and then just scuttle off and hide behind another alias.

So you don't get to say it to me.

Alan

--
Challenge-Response Systems are the best garbage-mail blockers
in the world. Spammers and trolls can't beat them and you
don't need to be a geek to use them. A brief introduction:
http://home.earthlink.net/~alanconnor/cr.html
  #67 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,uk.environment
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 315
Default SPAMMER TROLL ALERT!!! Alan 'no brains' Conner spews again...




delete commercial for his next to useless product....


  #68 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,uk.environment
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 14
Default [OT] SPAMMER TROLL ALERT!!! Alan 'no brains' Conner spews again...

On uk.environment, in et>, "rick" wrote:

<article not downloaded:
http://slrn.sourceforge.net/docs/README.offline>

Does the little weenie troll not like what I have to say?

Isn't that just too bad?

Good thing he has a threat-rating so low that I don't even
have to read his articles.

Alan

--
Challenge-Response Systems are the best garbage-mail blockers
in the world. Spammers and trolls can't beat them and you
don't need to be a geek to use them. A brief introduction:
http://home.earthlink.net/~alanconnor/cr.html
  #69 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,uk.environment
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 315
Default [OT] SPAMMER TROLL ALERT!!! Alan 'no brains' Conner spews again...


"Alan Connor" idiot with no equal wrote in message
...
> On uk.environment, in
> et>, "rick"
> wrote:
>
> <article not downloaded:
> http://slrn.sourceforge.net/docs/README.offline>
>
> Does the little weenie troll not like what I have to say?
>
> Isn't that just too bad?
>
> Good thing he has a threat-rating so low that I don't even
> have to read his articles.
> ================================

Ah, but you still do fool!!! That's what makes you such a fun
spammer....







snip commercial


  #70 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,uk.environment
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,028
Default [OT] Dutch (was: What If...We All Became Vegan?)


"Alan Connor" > wrote in message
...
> On uk.environment, in >, "Dutch" wrote:
>
> Correction: Someone who _sometimes_ calls himself "Dutch" wrote:
>
>> Path:
>> text.usenetserver.com!atl-c01.usenetserver.com!news.usenetserver.com!news2.e uro.net!62.58.50.20.MISMATCH!nntpfeed.zonnet.nl!fe eder1.cambrium.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!sn-xt-ams-06!sn-xt-ams-08!sn-ams!sn-feed-ams-01!sn-post-ams-01!sn-post-sjc-01!supernews.com!news.supernews.com!not-for-mail
>> From: "Dutch" >

>
> http://groups.google.com/advanced_group_search
> Dutch
> Results 1 - 100 of 7,430 posts in the last year
> 1 Dutchcharts
> 3 alt.abortion
> 17 alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian
> 4 alt.atheism
> 4 alt.autos.studebaker
> 2 alt.fan.landrover
> 1 alt.food.vegan
> 1 alt.online-services.roadrunner
> 3 alt.sex
> 3 alt.sex.exhibitionism
> 2 alt.sex.first-time
> 1 alt.sex.masterbation
> 1 alt.sex.masturbation
> 1 alt.sex.movies
> 1 alt.sex.pictures
> 1 alt.sex.pictures.d
> 1 alt.sex.pictures.female
> 1 alt.sex.pictures.misc
> 1 alt.sex.teens
> 1 alt.sex.uncut
> 1 alt.sex.young-women.foroldermen
> 1 alt.sports.football.college.fla-gators
> 1 alt.sports.hockey.nhl.edm-oilers
> 13 alt.sports.hockey.nhl.vanc-canucks
> 1 comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
> 1 comp.unix.solaris
> 3 hr.rec.kladjenje
> 8 hr.rec.tv.satelitska
> 1 it.comp.hardware.overclock
> 1 microsoft.public.office.misc
> 1 microsoft.public.security.homeusers
> 1 nl.muziek
> 2 nl.muziek.festivals
> 3 nl.sport.autosport
> 2 nl.sport.duiken
> 1 pl.hum.tlumaczenia
> 4 rec.music.marketplace.vinyl
> 1 rec.pets.dogs.behavior
> 1 rec.travel.europe
> 1 sci.electronics.repair
> 1 talk.abortion
> 1 uk.business.agriculture
>
> An average of 20+ posts a day with just _this_ alias.


Most of those are someone else.

> Serious motormouth. And like all trolls, he never stops running
> his mouth long enough to do any research or serious thinking, and
> thus his comments are ignorant in the extreme.


Heh, ironic comment.

> That is not a natural posting history. That's a sockpuppet's
> posting history.


It might be, but it's not mine.

>> Newsgroups: alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,uk.en vironment
>> Subject: What If...We All Became Vegan?
>> Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2006 12:00:11 -0700
>> Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com
>> Message-ID: >
>> References: . com>
>> . net>
>> .com>
>> . net>
>> . com>
>> >
>> . com>
>> >
>> .com>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> X-Priority: 3
>> X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
>> X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869
>> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869
>> X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
>> X-Complaints-To:
>> Lines: 73
>> Xref: usenetserver.com alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian:338215
>> alt.food.vegan:242089 uk.environment:187249
>> X-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2006 15:00:56 EDT (text.usenetserver.com)

>
> No posting IP. Whatta surprise.


I don't hide my IP, if it's not there it's because Supernews doesn't
transmit it. You want it?

>
> <article not downloaded:
> http://slrn.sourceforge.net/docs/README.offline>
>
> If you don't have the integrity to post under a single, unique
> alias, then I am not interested in what you have to say.


Dutch is the only alias I use.

> Because what you say cannot be trusted. You can say anything and then just
> scuttle off and hide behind another alias.
>
> So you don't get to say it to me.


I just did.


> Alan
>
> --
> Challenge-Response Systems are the best garbage-mail blockers
> in the world. Spammers and trolls can't beat them and you
> don't need to be a geek to use them. A brief introduction:
>
http://home.earthlink.net/~alanconnor/cr.html

Now I *seriously* mistrust your judgment.




  #71 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,uk.environment
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,028
Default [OT] SPAMMER TROLL ALERT!!! Alan 'no brains' Conner spews again...


"rick" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>
> "Alan Connor" idiot with no equal wrote in message
> ...
>> On uk.environment, in
>> et>, "rick" wrote:
>>
>> <article not downloaded:
>> http://slrn.sourceforge.net/docs/README.offline>
>>
>> Does the little weenie troll not like what I have to say?
>>
>> Isn't that just too bad?
>>
>> Good thing he has a threat-rating so low that I don't even
>> have to read his articles.
>> ================================

> Ah, but you still do fool!!! That's what makes you such a fun
> spammer....


That guy is seriously messed up. Does someone have a bot autoresponding
instantly to every post he makes?


  #72 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,uk.environment
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 60
Default [OT] SPAMMER TROLL ALERT!!! Alan 'no brains' Conner spewsagain...

Dutch wrote:

> "rick" > wrote in message
> ink.net...
>
>>"Alan Connor" idiot with no equal wrote in message
...
>>
>>>On uk.environment, in
k.net>, "rick" wrote:
>>>
>>><article not downloaded:
>>>http://slrn.sourceforge.net/docs/README.offline>
>>>
>>>Does the little weenie troll not like what I have to say?
>>>
>>>Isn't that just too bad?
>>>
>>>Good thing he has a threat-rating so low that I don't even
>>>have to read his articles.
>>>================================

>>
>>Ah, but you still do fool!!! That's what makes you such a fun
>>spammer....

>
>
> That guy is seriously messed up. Does someone have a bot autoresponding
> instantly to every post he makes?


He has made a *lot* of enemies over the years in
misc.survivalism, so I wouldn't be surprised.
  #73 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,uk.environment
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,028
Default [OT] SPAMMER TROLL ALERT!!! Alan 'no brains' Conner spews again...


"Leif Erikson" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> Dutch wrote:
>
>> "rick" > wrote in message
>> ink.net...
>>
>>>"Alan Connor" idiot with no equal wrote in message
...
>>>
>>>>On uk.environment, in
nk.net>, "rick" wrote:
>>>>
>>>><article not downloaded:
>>>>http://slrn.sourceforge.net/docs/README.offline>
>>>>
>>>>Does the little weenie troll not like what I have to say?
>>>>
>>>>Isn't that just too bad?
>>>>
>>>>Good thing he has a threat-rating so low that I don't even
>>>>have to read his articles.
>>>>================================
>>>
>>>Ah, but you still do fool!!! That's what makes you such a fun
>>>spammer....

>>
>>
>> That guy is seriously messed up. Does someone have a bot autoresponding
>> instantly to every post he makes?

>
> He has made a *lot* of enemies over the years in misc.survivalism, so I
> wouldn't be surprised.


I'm not surpised he's made enemies, he seems to make a point of trying to.


  #74 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,uk.environment
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 21
Default [OT] SPAMMER TROLL ALERT!!! Alan 'no brains' Conner spews again...

> >> That guy is seriously messed up. Does someone have a bot autoresponding
> >> instantly to every post he makes?

> >
> > He has made a *lot* of enemies over the years in misc.survivalism, so I
> > wouldn't be surprised.

>
> I'm not surpised he's made enemies, he seems to make a point of trying to.
>
>


Are we talking about Leif?


  #75 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,sci.environment,uk.environment,alt.global-warming
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,652
Default What If...We All Became Vegan?

On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 11:04:21 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:

><dh@.> wrote
>> I consider it to be very significant that the animals we raise for
>> food,
>> do NOT know they will be killed and eaten as Salt's Logic of the Talking
>> "ar" Pig and Chicken Run dishonestly encourage people to believe they do.

>
>Salt's essay on The Logic of the Larder does not imply that animals know
>they are destined to be killed and eaten.


"what shall be the reply of the Pig to the Philosopher? "Revered
moralist," he might plead, "it were unseemly for me, who am to-day a
pig, and to-morrow but ham and sausages, to dispute with a master of
ethics, yet to my porcine intellect it appeareth that having first determined
to kill and devour me . . . "

>The "talking pig" is an allegorical tool intended to address the conscience
>and attitudes of the reader/consumer.


"in my entry into the world my own predilection was in no wise considered,
nor did I purchase life on condition of my own butchery . . . "

Just like in Chicken Run http://tinyurl.com/fgtu9 the attempt is made to
create the contemptible and dishonest impression that the animals suffer from
knowledge that they will be killed by humans. You make it obvious that you're
in favor of "ar" when you oppose considering AW supporting facts like what
the animals gain, while at the same time you promote "ar" supporting, dishonest
kafkaesque fantasies like The Talking Pig and Chicken Run.


  #76 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,sci.environment,uk.environment,alt.global-warming
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,652
Default What If...We All Became Vegan?

On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 10:57:02 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:

>
><dh@.> wrote in message ...
>> On Sun, 13 Aug 2006 21:48:15 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
>>
>>>
>>><dh@.> wrote in message ...
>>>> On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 11:32:45 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>The LoL requires that you look at the lives of lifestock
>>>>
>>>> and also that "their life is a fairly happy one." - Salt
>>>>
>>>> That much alone is more than you'll ever be able to appreciate or be
>>>> honest enough to acknowledge, as I have already correctly pointed out.
>>>
>>>You don't know if the lives of the animals you eat are "fairly happy" or
>>>not. How can you base your philosophy on something you give no definition
>>>for and have no knowledge of?


I believe that most broilers, turkeys, cage free layers, beef cattle and dairy
cattle have decent lives of positive value.

>> It couldn't matter to you, because it could have no significance to you
>> regardless of why it does to anyone else. You're pretending to try to
>> think
>> about an aspect of the situation that admittedly could never have any
>> meaning
>> to you. Not only can you not appreciate it, but you don't think anyone
>> should
>> ever even bring it up....not Salt....not me...no one. So why do you try to
>> pretend
>> that you have some interest in a subject that you're maniacally opposed to
>> seeing anyone even mention?

>
>Answer the question.


I will. I challenge you to answer mine. You can't. Here it is again: why
do you try to pretend that you have some interest in a subject that you're
maniacally opposed to seeing anyone even mention?

>How can you base your philosophy on something you give
>no definition for and have no knowledge of?


I don't.
  #77 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,uk.environment
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,028
Default [OT] SPAMMER TROLL ALERT!!! Alan 'no brains' Conner spews again...


"Misterina" > wrote in message
...
>> >> That guy is seriously messed up. Does someone have a bot
>> >> autoresponding
>> >> instantly to every post he makes?
>> >
>> > He has made a *lot* of enemies over the years in misc.survivalism, so I
>> > wouldn't be surprised.

>>
>> I'm not surpised he's made enemies, he seems to make a point of trying
>> to.
>>
>>

>
> Are we talking about Leif?


No


  #78 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,sci.environment,uk.environment,alt.global-warming
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,028
Default What If...We All Became Vegan?


<dh@.> wrote in message ...
> On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 11:04:21 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
>
>><dh@.> wrote
>>> I consider it to be very significant that the animals we raise for
>>> food,
>>> do NOT know they will be killed and eaten as Salt's Logic of the Talking
>>> "ar" Pig and Chicken Run dishonestly encourage people to believe they
>>> do.

>>
>>Salt's essay on The Logic of the Larder does not imply that animals know
>>they are destined to be killed and eaten.

>
> "what shall be the reply of the Pig to the Philosopher? "Revered
> moralist," he might plead, "it were unseemly for me, who am to-day a
> pig, and to-morrow but ham and sausages, to dispute with a master of
> ethics, yet to my porcine intellect it appeareth that having first
> determined
> to kill and devour me . . . "
>
>>The "talking pig" is an allegorical tool intended to address the
>>conscience
>>and attitudes of the reader/consumer.

>
> "in my entry into the world my own predilection was in no wise considered,
> nor did I purchase life on condition of my own butchery . . . "
>
> Just like in Chicken Run http://tinyurl.com/fgtu9 the attempt is
> made to
> create the contemptible and dishonest impression that the animals suffer
> from
> knowledge that they will be killed by humans. You make it obvious that
> you're
> in favor of "ar" when you oppose considering AW supporting facts like what
> the animals gain, while at the same time you promote "ar" supporting,
> dishonest
> kafkaesque fantasies like The Talking Pig and Chicken Run.


So you don't understand what an allegory is.. I'm shocked!


  #79 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,sci.environment,uk.environment,alt.global-warming
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,028
Default What If...We All Became Vegan?


<dh@.> wrote in message ...
> On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 10:57:02 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
>
>>
>><dh@.> wrote in message ...
>>> On Sun, 13 Aug 2006 21:48:15 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>><dh@.> wrote in message
m...
>>>>> On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 11:32:45 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>The LoL requires that you look at the lives of lifestock
>>>>>
>>>>> and also that "their life is a fairly happy one." - Salt
>>>>>
>>>>> That much alone is more than you'll ever be able to appreciate or be
>>>>> honest enough to acknowledge, as I have already correctly pointed out.
>>>>
>>>>You don't know if the lives of the animals you eat are "fairly happy" or
>>>>not. How can you base your philosophy on something you give no
>>>>definition
>>>>for and have no knowledge of?

>
> I believe that most broilers, turkeys, cage free layers, beef cattle
> and dairy
> cattle have decent lives of positive value.


Easy to say.. but you eat pork and non-free-range eggs anyway, so what's the
point?

>>> It couldn't matter to you, because it could have no significance to
>>> you
>>> regardless of why it does to anyone else. You're pretending to try to
>>> think
>>> about an aspect of the situation that admittedly could never have any
>>> meaning
>>> to you. Not only can you not appreciate it, but you don't think anyone
>>> should
>>> ever even bring it up....not Salt....not me...no one. So why do you try
>>> to
>>> pretend
>>> that you have some interest in a subject that you're maniacally opposed
>>> to
>>> seeing anyone even mention?

>>
>>Answer the question.

>
> I will. I challenge you to answer mine. You can't. Here it is again:
> why
> do you try to pretend that you have some interest in a subject that you're
> maniacally opposed to seeing anyone even mention?


That's a stupid question, my interest in the topic is chiefly based on
people having dumb wrong-headed ideas like you.

>>How can you base your philosophy on something you give
>>no definition for and have no knowledge of?

>
> I don't.


Yes you do. You claim to believe that some animals have decent lives but you
don't know.


  #80 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,uk.environment
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 35
Default Dutch (was: What If...We All Became Vegan?)


Alan Connor wrote:
> On uk.environment, in >, "Dutch" wrote:
>
> Correction: Someone who _sometimes_ calls himself "Dutch" wrote:
>
> > Path: text.usenetserver.com!atl-c01.usenetserver.com!news.usenetserver.com!news2.e uro.net!62.58.50.20.MISMATCH!nntpfeed.zonnet.nl!fe eder1.cambrium.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!sn-xt-ams-06!sn-xt-ams-08!sn-ams!sn-feed-ams-01!sn-post-ams-01!sn-post-sjc-01!supernews.com!news.supernews.com!not-for-mail
> > From: "Dutch" >

>
> http://groups.google.com/advanced_group_search
> Dutch
> Results 1 - 100 of 7,430 posts in the last year
> 1 Dutchcharts
> 3 alt.abortion
> 17 alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian
> 4 alt.atheism
> 4 alt.autos.studebaker
> 2 alt.fan.landrover
> 1 alt.food.vegan
> 1 alt.online-services.roadrunner
> 3 alt.sex
> 3 alt.sex.exhibitionism
> 2 alt.sex.first-time
> 1 alt.sex.masterbation
> 1 alt.sex.masturbation
> 1 alt.sex.movies
> 1 alt.sex.pictures
> 1 alt.sex.pictures.d
> 1 alt.sex.pictures.female
> 1 alt.sex.pictures.misc
> 1 alt.sex.teens
> 1 alt.sex.uncut
> 1 alt.sex.young-women.foroldermen
> 1 alt.sports.football.college.fla-gators
> 1 alt.sports.hockey.nhl.edm-oilers
> 13 alt.sports.hockey.nhl.vanc-canucks
> 1 comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
> 1 comp.unix.solaris
> 3 hr.rec.kladjenje
> 8 hr.rec.tv.satelitska
> 1 it.comp.hardware.overclock
> 1 microsoft.public.office.misc
> 1 microsoft.public.security.homeusers
> 1 nl.muziek
> 2 nl.muziek.festivals
> 3 nl.sport.autosport
> 2 nl.sport.duiken
> 1 pl.hum.tlumaczenia
> 4 rec.music.marketplace.vinyl
> 1 rec.pets.dogs.behavior
> 1 rec.travel.europe
> 1 sci.electronics.repair
> 1 talk.abortion
> 1 uk.business.agriculture
>
> An average of 20+ posts a day with just _this_ alias.
>
> Serious motormouth. And like all trolls, he never stops running
> his mouth long enough to do any research or serious thinking, and
> thus his comments are ignorant in the extreme.
>
> That is not a natural posting history. That's a sockpuppet's
> posting history.
>
> > Newsgroups: alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,uk.en vironment
> > Subject: What If...We All Became Vegan?
> > Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2006 12:00:11 -0700
> > Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com
> > Message-ID: >
> > References: . com> . net> .com> . net> . com> > . com> > .com> > > >
> > X-Priority: 3
> > X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
> > X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869
> > X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869
> > X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
> > X-Complaints-To:
> > Lines: 73
> > Xref: usenetserver.com alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian:338215 alt.food.vegan:242089 uk.environment:187249
> > X-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2006 15:00:56 EDT (text.usenetserver.com)

>
> No posting IP. Whatta surprise.
>
> <article not downloaded:
> http://slrn.sourceforge.net/docs/README.offline>
>
> If you don't have the integrity to post under a single, unique
> alias, then I am not interested in what you have to say.
>
> Because what you say cannot be trusted. You can say anything and then just scuttle off and hide behind another alias.
>
> So you don't get to say it to me.
>
> Alan
>



Thanks for the stats.

Anyway, single unique alias my ass. I've heard this debate a lot
before, "I only read signed messages".. we should all have a public key
sig or else why would you bother reading? After all, I could just show
up tomorrow under a different name. Actually, signed messages wouldn't
eliminate that option would they.

The truth is, those with the skills to stand strong behind a new name
or no name are likely more worthy of our attention then those who hide
behind an established one.

And those with an established name are likely to have no real
anonymity.

Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Intereting Vegan Problem - Please Help : How to get Caterers toGet/Provide Vegan Food. n Vegan 1 15-05-2008 03:04 AM
Vegan Cooking at International Vegan Festival Don Quinoa Vegetarian cooking 0 29-01-2007 11:46 AM
Vegan baking basics for a non-vegan [email protected] Vegan 0 06-11-2006 04:53 PM
It's amazing how in a Vegan group someone could hate a Doctor becausehe's a vegan Beach Runner Vegan 15 04-11-2005 03:06 PM
A Challenge To The Vegan Bakers: Help Me Modify This Recipe :Vegan Pumpkin Flax Muffins Steve Vegan 2 27-05-2004 05:07 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:23 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 FoodBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Food and drink"