View Single Post
Old 02-20-2012, 02:44 PM   #143 (permalink)
redpoint5
Human Environmentalist
 
redpoint5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Oregon
Posts: 12,549

Acura TSX - '06 Acura TSX
90 day: 24.19 mpg (US)

Lafawnda - CBR600 - '01 Honda CBR600 F4i
90 day: 47.32 mpg (US)

Big Yeller - Dodge/Cummins - '98 Dodge Ram 2500 base
90 day: 21.82 mpg (US)

Chevy ZR-2 - '03 Chevrolet S10 ZR2
90 day: 17.14 mpg (US)

Model Y - '24 Tesla Y LR AWD
Thanks: 4,245
Thanked 4,416 Times in 3,388 Posts
I want to thank the moderators for allowing this thread to continue despite some strong emotional reactions and the drift from the original topic. Keeping the dialogue going in a respectful way is important in making informed opinions and having them tested by other points of view.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesqf View Post
No, it's not. It is intended as an accurate description. If it is to be banned because it is considered insulting by some, why is not the misuse of the word "skeptic" to describe the same people - which we true skeptics consider equally insulting - also banned?

I notice a post using the insulting term "warmist". Others have used the insulting term "climate alarmist". So why not equal treatment for everone? Or are you just pushing your own prejudices?
I'm not really for the banning of any language because we should be mature enough to not let these words get under our skin. The words themselves have no meaning except those given by the speaker. I could use any word as an insult to others, but might use another just as a harmless descriptor.

I've been guilty of resorting to insult on forums before, but if our goal is really to inform and to shape the opinion of others, then resorting to insults is a sure way to turn people off.
__________________
Gas and Electric Vehicle Cost of Ownership Calculator







Give me absolute safety, or give me death!
  Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to redpoint5 For This Useful Post:
Ecky (02-20-2012), Ladogaboy (02-20-2012)