Collecting
10 messages in this thread
The purpose of a forum is to bring out all points of view, open debate. Name
calling, personal attacks and questioning peoples intellect isn't really
needed. This collection issue seemed to only bring out one point of view,
shouln't all points be brought forth? I don't agree with all of you and i don't
expect you to agree with me, but I will not insult you.
I think everyone's been pretty level-headed about this so far. Who's doing the
name calling? I for one welcome diverse opinions about these matters. No, I
don't expect to change your mind. And if you do change your mind, I won't hold
it against you. 🙂
Todd:
My reply to your note was, admittedly, heated, but I hope it was not without
light.
When you say that your opponents' views are rationalizations, you have
engaged in a personal attack. You are suggesting that they are 1) biased, and
2)unable to deliberate about an issue so as to free themselves from their
biases.
Todd, I did use the phrase aesthetic Nazism, which I thought was harsh, but
the more I think on it, the better I think it describes the situation.
Afterall, the Nazi politic was based on national socialism and the assumption
that there was a common good known only to a political elite.
BTW, I agree with John: your views are most definitely welcome in this
forum. There are no objectionable people; only objectionable ideas.
Cheers.
Nathan
The Nazies were a brutual regime of racist who took what they wanted by forced
and tried to destroy anyone who opposed they without debate. They believed it
to be their birthright. You implied I was a Communist in the same paragragh. I
am not a racist and I would not try to silence anyone.
I believe everyone should have a say on this issue, you, me anyone who
cares, which there are probably not enough of. The public should decide, all of
us, don't expect 100% agreement.
Nazism has different images for different people. To me finders keepers
is rationalizing.
For your info one individual implied that I was both a Nazi and a Communist in
the same sentence. Quite a feat. Nazi were racisist and facist who took what
they wanted. Thats what some highgraders do.
Sorry, I hadn't seen that message before I replied to yours. What's a
"highgrader"?
When I was in college, studing Geology, the term was used there. It is not an
insult, similiar to rockhound. A Highgrader is someone who searches for and
sells valuable mineral specimens for profit. Well maybe it is, I don't know,
some people think Lawyer is an insult. There was a certain group of people
there who were able to put themselves through college highgrading. Often they
would break into private property, blast the hell out of the hanging rock, take
what they wanted, then leave the owner to deal with this mess. Surely you know
of the mineral black market that is out there. Sell these specimens there.
I thought that "high grader" was a derogatory term used to describe someone
selling a mining claim, who "salted" the rock with the metal in question, in
order to make the mine look more productive than it was.
I myself have never heard it used in that manner. I don't know what you would
call someone who salts a specimin to con another person into investing. Cheat,
con man, crook and thief works for me.
Many ores mined ar attually low grade deposits of miners on a
microscopic level. A spectacular macroscopic specimen of a given mineral is
used call high grade. So people who seek out and trade in such items are called
High graders.
Hi, John–
I dimly remember such a usage for "highgrader", but what "high-grading" has
most often been used for in my presence is simply going through a pile of
specimens one has picked up and discarding the less desirable ones.
–Doug