Number Two

[Perseus]

Hello,

You should choose two on the list.

Andy

 

[Dissident]

Okay, since the options didnt come out, I will propose the following:

This guy should...

1- Be baned

2- Not be baned

 

[Kuu]

He smells of new age syncretism and parapsychology to me...

Still that is not enough to ban someone, is it?

If he doesn't explain his views or participate in debate, then he will just fade away...

 

[Jesin]

Tekton's right. We shouldn't ban him, or at least not yet. Given time, either he'll start discussing coherently or he'll go away. If he still doesn't, then we ban him, but not for a while yet.

 

[Dissident]

I guess you are right, I still expect him to defend himself or something, he is online right now.

Speak up little man!

 

[Ogion]

Yes, like first prove that you are human: If you count Germany, the USA and Canada, how many states did you count?

Well, seriously, either he's a stupid bot, or he just isn't interested in discussion.

Ogion

 

[Perseus]

Tekton's right. We shouldn't ban him, or at least not yet. Given time, either he'll start discussing coherently or he'll go away. If he still doesn't, then we ban him, but not for a while yet.

Perception should says the evidence should be lodged before you pass judgement. So go perceive or answer the polls that work. Details.

The Eagle really does not care anyway.

Andy
http://soredragon.blogspot.com/

 

[Cabbo Pearimo]

I say if he says anything which contributes, recognize it as so. If not, ignore him (although not on a general basis).

 

[Vrecknidj]

This reminds me of Kierkegaard. He suggested that existential choice was sometimes of this sort. He pointed out that some of the more deeply problematic questions that we face in life are criterion-less.

What a horror: criterion-less choice.

Pick A or B. Your life may depend upon it. You have nothing to go on.

Ugh.

Dave