[Vision2020] Worthwhile Dialog On Vision2020

[Ted Moffett]

The comments at the bottom are questionable.  While Vision2020
often features what seems to me to be pointless, ego driven, silly or
redundant discussion, sometimes by contributors who refuse to consider
credible evidence that sheds doubt on their beliefs, discussion which
nonetheless still may entertain or educate some, there are a number of
contributors to this list offering worthwhile content who have been involved
in dialog of substance that extended longer than "a few consecutive
messages."  I could reference the contributors and the threads I think were
worthwhile, but then anyone who has "been on Vision2020 for years" who was
paying attention would know who and what I am writing about.

Ted Moffett

On 5/1/09, Chasuk <chasuk at gmail.com> wrote:


>  I've been
> on Vision2020 for years, and I've seen scant evidence of real
> discussion ever occurring, at least not for periods exceeding a few
> consecutive messages.  This isn't a problem restricted to Vision2020.
> I regularly read freerepublic.com, worldnetdaily.com,
> drudgereport.com, huffingtonpost.com and dailykos.com.  Sadly, I get
> flecked with the same drool at all of those places.
>
> Chas
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20090501/cf1bcdb5/attachment-0001.html