🚀 go-pugleaf

>> The real problem with the word "free" is that there is an
>> ideology shared by conservatives and Libertarians which
>> holds "the freedom to maximize profit" above just about
>> everything else.  (Many netfolk come from rather privileged
>> backgrounds and never had to worry about the everything else;
>> thus we see this ideology held and advocated by dispropor-
>> tionate numbers of netfolk.)
> What a penetrating analysis.  And with such well-documented
> assumption [sic].

=o= Which assumption are you saying lacks documentation?  I will
admit that no adequate demographic analysis of the net exists,
though it doesn't really take rocket science to figure out that
access to the net varies with class.  And while my portrayal of
said ideology indulged in editorializing, there are plenty of
conservative and Libertarian writings that say essentially the
same thing.

> Now see what you can tell us about the definition of "ad
> hominem argument."

=o= Actually, your article brings to mind the definition of
_non_sequitur_.  The point of my article is that I've observed
that a disproportionate number of netfolk hold use a definition
of "free" that derives itself from that ideology.  I offered a
hypothesis for this, though I never claimed that it was etched
in stone.  Even if my hypothesis is wrong, the observation still
stands.  So what's your problem?
    <_Jym_>


In-reply-to: chased@rbbb.Eng.Sun.COM's message of 19 Feb 92 22:47:45 GMT
Newsgroups: alt.activism.d,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: The Right Way to Tax DAT
References: <40217922357550500@prep.ai.mit.edu>
	<kq5nkhINNs06@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM>
--text follows this line--
>> In fact, psychological studies show that the desire for an
>> extrinsic reward (such as profit) generally hampers creative
>> activities such as writing music.
> Citations of the relevant studies would be nice.

=o= Isn't there a citation for this distributed with Emacs?
    <_Jym_>