Re: Love spats in Love-Hounds

[Steve Berlin <stev0@chaco.com>]

|>oug says:

> 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.

I am going to have to disagree with you there.  I think meta-
discussions are wonderful, and would like to pursue further
discussion about your meta-meta-discussion.

In fact, I can safely say that I never meta-discussion I didn't like.

- Stev0, Escher, Bach

<Insert Monty Python quote HERE>