PAM Doesn't Answer
Any Questions That
Have Intellectual Integrity
dear PAM (or Cliff Walker),
i was wondering why you don't seem to answer peoples questions with intellectual integrity on your website. instead, you seem very cowardly in your approach -- choosing to only reply to those who make poor argumentation. what do you see as implications of this observation? if you would be so inclined to receive it, i would love to share with you my thoughts on the matter!
i wonder how sure of your conclusions you are.
have a nice day (for no other reason than poly/mono/pantheists are an easy target and phony self-esteem booster)!
[advertisement for "free" e-mail service removed]
From: "Positive Atheism" <email@example.com>
Subject: Re: hello :)
Date: March 01, 2004 14:30
i was wondering why you don't seem to answer peoples questions with intellectual integrity on your website. instead, you seem very cowardly in your approach -- choosing to only reply to those who make poor argumentation.
It is very easy to fling accusations such as this when you know you'll never be called upon to give any examples, isn't it?
How is it that you know to whom I do and do not choose to reply or what my criteria is for replying or not replying? Be sure to show your work, too! This is not an observation that was made by someone who's taken a very good look at our operation. Rather, this is an "observation" that was made by a man who was very recently asked never again to write to our domain due to his abusive treatment and his use of threatening language.
Since you didn't get it the first time, I will ask one more time before forwarding this entire dialogue to your free e-mail service's "Abuse" department and asking them to filter your account for us:
Please refrain from writing to this domain!
Positive Atheism Magazine
Eight-and-one-half years of service to
people with no reason to believe