-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Marc Riddell stated for the record:
On
4/13/07, Marc Riddell <michaeldavid86(a)comcast.net> wrote:
> Are you in favor of making people feel their opinions are worthless?
on
4/13/07 8:58 AM, Ron Ritzman at ritzman(a)gmail.com wrote:
Worthless no but perhaps irrelevant to a
particular issue. If somebody
voted "oppose" in an RFA because the nominee is a "Scorpio", the
opinion might not be "worthless" but it would definitely be
"non-sequitur".
Thanks, Ron, and you're right. Some may see this as nitpicky, but this is a
crucial distinction. "Worthless" is a powerful word when used in reference
to any aspect of a person.
As to your example, their response of "Scorpio" in that situation could be
met with "huh?" :-)
Okay, let's get nitpicky. If we assume for the sake of discussion that
their response of "Scorpio" is not worthless, we are assuming that it is
worth something. What exactly would such a response be worth? What
value would it have?
For the record, I maintain that it would add nothing, would contribute
no value, and would be, in fact, worthless.
And also for the record, it is still my belief that every opinion - like
every person - has some value. And to use the word "worthless" in any
reference to any aspect of a person is hurtful.
I'm simply trying to advocate caution when using the word. It is rhetoric
like that which can harm relationships and make productive communication
impossible.
Marc