Wow, didn’t that put a dampener on this ‘discussion’!

The stark truth is unanswerable so it seems.

Adrian’s classic admittal that:

<< …the difference with Harris is that most people (except Ludwig) have a deep revulsion towards the act of a grown man sexually touching underage girls; a revulsion that goes very deep into our souls… >>

It just overrides cool-headed logical thought processes and realisitic perspectives.

Hasn’t this thread so emphatically proven this!

Talking of admissions, Ludwig...

>>...most people (except Ludwig) have a deep revulsion towards the act of a grown man sexually touching underage girls; a revulsion that goes very deep into our souls<<

Your lack of revulsion is precisely the characteristic that puts you at odds with the majority of posters here. You seem to take pride in it, for some strange reason...

>>It just overrides cool-headed logical thought processes and realisitic perspectives.<<

I suggest you review that statement. Because it tells us that in your opinion, it is necessary to have an absence of revulsion towards "the act of a grown man sexually touching underage girls", in order to think about it in a logical fashion.

I wonder what other crimes - say, a father throwing his four year-old daughter off the West Gate Bridge - engender the same lack of revulsion. Which was, of course, the reason why I asked you to express your personal views on Harris' crimes.

Now we know. And frankly, it is not a pretty picture.

Regarding Pericles:

He and I have probably had more exchanges between us than any other two people on this forum. We’ve had many long debates, going back several years. So I know his nature pretty well.

He delights in playing the man, not the ball!

He came off the end of this very long discussion all about GDP: http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=6365&page=0#193701

…where he got trounced and finally gave up on 26 July, at which point he jumped straight over to the Rolf thread with this gem of a post on 27 July: http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=6462#193479

This post engages Jay123, who by that time everyone well and truly knew to be a nutcase, with only one motive: to say whatever he could to make Ludwig out to be as bad as he possibly could.

Not only did Pericles engage him, but he offered nothing related to the subject of the thread.

He had not been on this thread up to that point, except for a couple of much earlier comments.

He wrote in a subsequent post:

<< The reason I have not been involved in the "debate" is simply because there is nothing to debate. >>

Ahh but then there suddenly WAS something to debate, was there?

No, the reason he jumped over onto this thread was to play the man, not to debate the subject. His subsequent posts were geared towards personal denigration. He was in effect screaming at me:

‘I am a grub who is not interested in this debate but is only using it as a vehicle to attack Ludwig, because he beat me so comprehensively in our previous discussion, and I HATE him for that. I am NOT someone that any sensible person would have anything to do with’.

So I did the right thing and refused to acknowledge his existence.

continued

There are only two respondents after nearly nine years on OLO that I have ever just ignored because they have gone crawling in the gutter with personal attacks to the extent that these two have. Both on this thread: Jay and Pericles. One of them was not just suspended, but banned for this sort of behaviour. The other operates in a slightly less blatant manner.

I said recently:

>> …if there is actually anyone here who is genuinely interested in the thread subject <<

…to which Pericles smartly retorted:

<< You can count me in, Ludwig. I most certainly am >> (5 Sept).

Well, I’d love to believe that. But everything he writes runs counter to it.

So, if he was to give an undertaking to actually debate the subject, in neutral terms, and steer clear of the personal BS, then we could have a good discussion here. Ah but I think he would soon lose interest if that were to be the rule.

I am tempted to give it a go, even though I foresee a 99% chance of it failing.

There is afterall a whole lot more to be discussed here…. and if we were to get into it as we did on the other thread regarding GDP, then it could prove to be very interesting.

Ludwig said, among other things, ".... just overrides cool-headed logical thought processes and realisitic perspectives.

Hasn’t this thread so emphatically proven this!"

No!.

You still don't get it, do you Ludwig.

It is not about my being "trounced"- anybody reading that particular thread quickly realizes how little you actually understand about economics - and it is not about playing the man. You made yourself the target with your opening statement, compounded the problem by proceeding to blame Harris' victims, and then complain that you have become the focus of attention.

Judgment was passed on Harris, and most folk understand that it was his just desserts for a long string of sleazy, criminal acts against young girls. You may have some friends in your part of the world who disagree, but that does not justify a massive, seemingly never-ending discussion on your perception of his actions.

The topic is just that. Your perception.

Your perception, right from the opening post, was that Harris' offences were trivial. Since this was your perception, you should not be at all surprised that you are taken to task for owning that view. If you choose to think of this as an attack, rather than an invitation to meditate on your on-the-nose value set, then so be it.

Incidentally, you got this completely wrong, in your attempt to deflect attention:

>>he got trounced and finally gave up on 26 July, at which point he jumped straight over to the Rolf thread with this gem of a post on 27 July<<

My first post on this thread was on 3rd July, over three weeks earlier, when I made my feelings crystal clear:

>>I hope they put him away. Ideally, with a six-foot-six tattooed father-of-teenage-daughters as a cellmate<<

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=6462#192061

So you can stop trying to change history, yet again, and reflect on the character that you have now placed on display on this Forum.

It is not a particularly attractive persona, I'm afraid.