Re: anonymous posts

• From: castrioti <no_reply_at_yahoogroups.com>
• Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 21:32:23 -0000
• Message-ID: <b8c9h7+ch61_at_...>

a lot of people, consciously or not, seem to 
> use this forum to show off how much they know, and it can get kind 
of 
> tiresome. 

Okay, the part about Italo Svevo being followed by Shakespeare looked 
like it was meant to show that it is possible to have a question on 
an obscure name followed by an equally difficult one on a name that 
is not-so-obscure. Whether you agree with that or not, I think it's a 
bit cynical to assume that any time someone posts information 
containing names that people have not heard of, they're really just 
trying to pump up their own egos or show off their "obscure" 
knowledge or that they're just an expert trying to drive the game in 
their own particular direction. Maybe a lot of people have never 
heard of Svevo and don't care. Fine. But it doesn't mean that 
everytime someone posts about a person/place/thing/idea on the 
difficulty level of Svevo that they're a showoff. People should be 
able to argue their point using whatever example they deem most 
lucid. It shouldn't matter whether that includes poor, broken English 
or an example from Italian lit (not that these are exact opposites). 
If you can prove they're wrong, do it. If you think they're right, 
say so. But if you want to attack their point, focus on the main 
idea, not the nouns that you think are obscure-sounding that they use 
to convey it. And if you want to call someone a loudmouth, arrogant 
ACF-fundamentalist ego-pumping chumpmonkey, take it to that other 
board (not to say that's what Joon was doing).

--Wesley