Love spats in Love-Hounds

[nessus@mit.edu (Douglas Alan)]

In article <3fgmm2$a5n@transu.cute.fi> murazor@cute.cute.fi (Mikko
Barros) writes:

>   If the Lovehounds known to be loud and pressuring in their opinions, why 
>   not re-christen them...Love does not condemn, nor does it judge.

Neither do hounds, but neither love nor hounds are always pleasant.
The name implies a certain amount of enthusiasm, which also breeds a
degree of disdain for dissenting opinions.  This is as it should be.

In any case, please desist these boring meta-discussions.  There's
nothing more boring than a boring discussion, except for a
meta-discussion.  If you don't like the material being posted, post
your own material that you do like.  This being a
meta-meta-discussion, I am going to stop right here.

|>oug