Are the charges false?

Then the messenger is asking to be charged. I'd call this "provocation" ....

provocateur in French

Type 100 words in a text file save it.
Then take a screenshot of as small of a box that can contain all 100 words and save it.
Compare the size!

Unnecessary bandwidth use for the rich fucks of the planet who don't have to pay or wait for download.

I can escalate your charges from misdemeanor to constitute intent of causing harm to the public well being.

Also resisting objective criticism may be an additional charge.

#Sophists to protect and serve the public

@felixthehat

2/2

What's really egregious are the #kleptocrats and #sophists the #CorporateState chose to head the report — individuals that got us into this mess!

See #InnesWillox, shill for glorified #PropertyDevelopers (we mean #universites), the #MigrationCouncil and other #speculators and #rentseekers. Two years ago, he was all too happy to make us vulnerable.

Four Corners did a good job of highlighting others on the "commission".

Well done, Four Corners! Maybe, the last #journalists in Australia.

@dlovell That's the #sophists vs. #philosophers debate all over again.

I realised a few years back (on Google+) that there were two major schools of online discussion. One is #rhetorical, aimed at winning or convincing. The other is #dialectic, interested in understanding or finding truth. The two are almost wholly incompatible.

Dialectic discussion depends strongly on (I want to say "requires", though I'm not certain of that) a mutual respect. It's quite easiy disrupted.

Encounters with rhetoricians should be considered at best training on their methods. References to the classsics, such as Aristotle's Sophistical Refutations (the original "Bullshit Arguments Which Must Die"), and Cicero, remain useful. Very rarely can you actually win a concession. Less rarely, learn something.

@woozle (toot.cat's Supreme Uberwensch) was party to that G+ thread and has a similar interest in epistemic debate.