<div dir="ltr"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 6:42 PM, Craig Aldinger <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:gonzogone@gmail.com">gonzogone@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div dir="ltr">I may be just a reader of the forum for the vast majority of the posts arriving at my electronic doorstep but, I feel rather mystified..... I thought this is the Kansas City LINUX Users Group.<br>While I can be massively entertained by the sociological/political/religious meanderings of some folks who post here, my primary interest is in learning as much as I can about, you guessed it, LINUX.<br>
</div></blockquote></div><br>It happens occasionally that we discuss things other than Linux, the *BSDs, other Unices, or even the DOS/Windows lineage. Given the wide variety of political and religious leanings of this group, when we do that, it's almost certain to result in a flamefest.<br>
<br>Especially when people resort to a particular form of ad hominem that seems to be really popular lately:<br> X: I don't like ____.<br> Y: ____ is (all/disproportionally) non-white, therefore you're a racist. [The unstated conclusion is that anything a racist likes/agrees with is automatically bad.]<br>
<br><br>It's getting on my last nerve. In fact, in the spirit of Godwin, I'm going to propound my very own Internet Law. Here's my working version: "Calling someone a 'racist', rather than addressing the truth or falsity of their position, is an implict confession that one is unable to do the latter."<br>
<br><br><br></div>