(urth) interview questions

[Craig Brewer]

Lee said:
>I disagree. When you tell someone else they are wrong it means you either think 
>they are: 
>
>1. ignorant- i.e. they do not have access to the full range of information 
>necessary 
>
>or
>2. stupid- i.e. they do not have sufficient brain power to use the information 
>correctly

Lee, does that mean that people have to agree with you or you feel personally 
insulted?

There's always the option of just ignoring people who disagree with you.

I apologize if I pop in here to sound all school marmish, but I think it might 
help if we just stuck to the topics. Lately, there's been a lot of talking about 

peoples' motivations for disagreeing. Couldn't we just drop all that? If you 
disagree with someone, do it and give your reasons. And if your theories find 
disagreement, either post a rebuttal or accept it or ignore it. Just don't 
belabor
the issue, and don't get insulting by assuming their intentions. Some people
are just going to disagree with you. But so what? Why do you need their
approval to believe your own ideas?

Personally, I find it better to respond with silence if you think someone is 
treating you like an ass. Otherwise, you just end up in snark-fests.

I'd also second Witz' point that not every theory needs to be defended. Post all 

you want, but expect resistance. Don't treat every skeptical response as if it's 

a challenge that needs to be met. Otherwise, we end up with a lot of repetition,
hair-splitting, and speculation that gets very far away from a discussion of the
the words that Wolfe actually wrote.

And now I have done what I continually find useless when others do it: talk 
about
manners on the internet. I live for futility. Think I'm gonna go read some Barry
Malzberg to be with my own kind...