From: David Sternlight <david@sternlight.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 1996 20:28:39 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Markoff on Clipper III
In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19960715184219.00827588@panix.com>
Message-ID: <v03007600ae10e42fe927@[192.187.162.15]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


At 11:42 AM -0700 7/15/96, Duncan Frissell wrote:

>Yes, David I would say you practice "contumely" -- Rudeness or contempt
>arising from arrogance; insolence.  But then so do I.

That's not what my dictionary says, and what I said was that your message
deserved it.

Watch closely--there are some subtle distinctions between what you claim
and what my dictionary says. Contumely is "harsh language, arising from
haughtiness or contempt". In the case of your message, the harsh language
it deserves arises from contempt for the way you said what you said.

Harsh language need not be rude, and arrogance and insolence don't enter
into my dictionary's definition (Merriam Webster's Collegiate Dictionary,
Tenth Edition).

Finally, saying that it deserves contumely is not itself using harsh
language but rather is a fairly polite form of derision. Had I heaped
contumely on it, that might have been using harsh language. I didn't,
because that would have been counterproductive. Thus your accusation is
invalid, despite your attempt to soften it with the "me, too".

Ain't educated rhetoric grand.

David