[eDebate] Geez - We have no method......

Josh Hoe jbhdb8
Sun May 7 14:10:13 CDT 2006


Dont think you suck,

You said those things....Am I wrong?  I quoted you directly....

Dont think I am great, just dont get why you have so much contempt for the
process and the people.

Josh


On 5/7/06, debate at ou.edu <debate at ou.edu> wrote:
>
>
> I new just would have to post sometime.
>
> Yeah Josh, I say everyone sucks.  I have destroyed all my processional
> relationships, while you still have your.
>
> Good job.  (Pat on the back)
>
> Josh is great yall!  Jackie sucks -- just in case you didnt get josh's
> message.
>
> Okay, now back to topic construction.
>
>
> From I suck
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Josh Hoe <jbhdb8 at gmail.com>
> Date: Sunday, May 7, 2006 11:59 am
> Subject: Re: [eDebate] Geez - We have no method......
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > Two things were exposed by this email:
> >
> > 1.  People who support traditional topic construction are sheep
> >
> > "I think this explains how the cattle is herded, but what are the
> > pillars of
> > pedigogy utilized to create a topic wording."
> >
> > It sure is nice that Jackie is around to set us all straight about
> > what the
> > liberatory pedagogy is...Golly gee, and before I met Jack I looked
> > and acted
> > just like sheep...Thank goodness for the Jackie method....Thank God
> > he is
> > coming to save us all with his liberatory methods.  Jack brand
> > Topics "thank
> > goodness."
> >
> > 2. The topic committee and relationship to the larges community are
> > mostcharacterized by shadiness.
> >
> > "If you want to say nothing "shady" happens in this community
> > dealing with
> > rules, what the topic areas are and other issues, then you are
> > really just
> > kissing some a$$ right now."
> >
> > Yes, its true, even though he is leaving the community he just HAD
> > to smooch
> > some ass before he left.  You are so wise....Your backhanded "I am
> > surepeople really try" stuff is exposed for what it is nonsense.
> > You are on a
> > crusade and the topic committee will feel your crusading presence
> > soon.
> > Most important, you are right, I know when I was on the topic
> > committee we
> > got together in our secret community circumventing meeting prior to
> > the open
> > meeting....We planned out the arguments we would have before hand
> > so it
> > would appear we didnt have a real common agenda....We agreed on
> > which topic
> > we would write ahead of time and the other topics were just
> > smokescreens so
> > that we would never have a broad topic again.
> >
> > Most important, it is obvious that you have contempt for the people
> > and the
> > process.  Not sure why anyone should give you the consideration you
> > expectof them given your open superiority and contempt.
> >
> > Maybe that wasnt what you intended?  If not, your frustrations with
> > theprocess are igniting some reactions that maybe are a bit over
> > the line?
> >
> > I am looking forward to the "Post Topic Committee" Jackie report
> > which I
> > suspect will read like somewhat like the Weekly World News.
> >
> > Frankly, this isnt even about broad or limited topics....As you
> > know, I like
> > limited topics, but I am more than willing to go with a "Jackie"
> > topic once
> > as an experiment...I, for one, cant wait to see the miraculous
> > effects.
> > Josh
> > aka topic committee ass kisser
> >
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/attachments/20060507/7406ec42/attachment.html 



More information about the Mailman mailing list