EnviroLink Forum

The point had to do with how informed an opinion is, not what it is. It stands to reason that one's opinion of a literary work they have read would be more highly regarded than that of someone who has not read it...at least, by those who are generally reasonable.

_________________
TANG SOO!

Only if it was expected that everyone would share the same opinion. And if you ignore that all the other reviews would have to be held in the same "regard" because the reviewers have also read the book....even if they are not the same as Josh's. You would then have to give the same amount of credibility to all reviews equally....including the ones that don't support your opinion.

Your only point in this is to support Josh.

So there.

**And just a side note.....ROFL....you all don't even know what you are arguing about....I was just curious how long you would carry that on and how long until you, fos, jumped on the bandwagon without reading. Apparently neither you or Josh bothered to read "all" of what Johnny had said..........or maybe Josh just only used a small excerpt of what was actually said so his comments would look justified....................


So you see, this was all about an unreasonable and unwarranted attack on Johnny and an opportunity to make some derogatory comments about other people. See, what he said was not unreasonable or uniformed, afterall.

Pot meet kettle.

_________________
I use red, not because of anger but to define my posts to catch rebuttals latter and it makes the quote feature redundent for me. The rest of you pick your own color.

Life is a time capsule we strive to fill with precious memories.

True. The opinion in and of itself doesn't matter. Those with like experiences in forming one, however--in this case having read a literary work--are afforded the same credence regardless of what they actually think of it.



I don't have a point, per se, so much as I am simply interpreting something someone else said.



That's good, for I am not arguing.



I'm sure you were. Since I'm not addressing opinions in and of themselves but rather attempting to clarify something someone else stated, there is no need for me to read, offer an opinion on it, much less argue about it.



No, I didn't read all of what Johnny said. One last time--I read what Josh said.



I'll say, you always did have a keen eye for what did and didn't constitute an attack.

_________________
TANG SOO!

_________________
Charles Vrooman: http://www.freewebs.com/vrooman

Charles no disrespect to you or your book is intended. I am sure it is a great book for most that enjoy the genre of books. And this is really not about the book, itself, at all.




But as to the other claim Josh has made, which has now been clarified by the author, himself................
Josh Wrote:


Charles Wrote:


Now none of those are my own words and sterotyping, did happen by the authors own admission. So who was rushing before getting the facts??

And there is nothing wrong with having the Vets sterotyped for the purpose of book, it is literary non fiction and there is allowed to be artistic license and all...but point being.....it did happen and does exist.

I would agree, although I didn't observe any such actions.



So long as said position's relevance is to something rather than everything, I don't see a problem.



Indeed.



That being the case, what's the big damn deal over which Johnny is disgusted?

_________________
TANG SOO!

Well admittedly and repeatedly, you said, you did NOT read everything, only what Josh wrote, so it is understandable you would not have observed much.








Ummmm...Reading 101....and I even quoted it for you, SHEESH

Quote:

......stereotyped as a "bad Vietnam Officer"

in Charles own words BTW......(and yes reference has been made to a real Vietnam Vet)...and it wasn't - "stereotyped as an antagonist"....antagonist is the position that character holds.

Indeed...only what Josh wrote. So who were you referring to when you spoke of those things I apparently missed--purposely misleading, mis-stating, selectively quoting and goal post moving?



You mean fiction, right?



Yeah, that's what I thought you meant.

Either way, I question Johnny's disgust. So what if an antagonist happens to be a Vietnam vet? So what if an entire group of them is portrayed as bad guys?

_________________
TANG SOO!

And BTW...I did catch the goal post move you made from "there was no stereotyping" to why Johnny would be disgusted by the stereotyping. Nice try.

It's not a story. It's what I'm genuinely attempting to do by granting the benefit of a doubt that no one's going after anyone, no one is misrepresenting, misquoting, or what-have-you. If you prefer the opposite approach, I honestly don't give a rat's ass. As for championing uninformed opinions, better you than me.

_________________
TANG SOO!

_________________
Charles Vrooman: http://www.freewebs.com/vrooman