Originally Posted by taustin
He's arguing with something nobody actually said. Again.
My premise was that it's possible for someone to reasonably view lookie-loos as being unethical. His response, consistently, has been that I'm wrong because it's possible for such behavior to not be unethical. There is no connection between the two statements. I never said it wasn't possible for it to not be unethical. He's never actually denied that it's possible for it to be unethical.
He's simply not responding to what I said. He's arguing with what he apparently wishes I'd said instead.
Ah, I see the source of your confusion and I think I can help.
I (mistakenly it seems) thought our discussion was over. You expressed your opinion, I expressed mine, you then suggested I was too stupid to follow your points, at which point I posted a (fairly hilarious, IMHO) picture of Emperor Palpatine. I guess I just assumed that we'd have to agree to disagree about the issue, and whether or not I have the basic reading comprehension skills necessary to follow your points.
The poste above that you responded to with an accusation about a strawman argument was in response to theinfamousj, not to you. I thought that was fairly clear from quoting theinfamousj's post, but that's always easy to miss when you've worked up a full head of steam.
As a bonus apology, I'm sorry you took my accurate quote of yours as a dig against your spelling. In future, I will avoid using "sic" in quoted text, and will bear full responsibility for any and all misspellings in the quote; it's a heavy burden to bear, but I bear it cheerfully to help maintain MobileRead's atmosphere of camaraderie.
As even more compensation to you, I've purposely placed two typos in this post! You may quote those with a "sic" if you wish; I am at your mercy on this one.