I guess it depends on what context – on Wikipedia, I’m always trying to strive for NPOV. On scott’s blog, I think I’ve gotten it down to a dull roar with Paul and Lana, and actually had some pretty good back and forth with Keiki Watson. I’m being more selective with who I bother to reply to, I suppose.
I think another part of it is that people aren’t really baiting me…most of my conversations only get thick when there is some back and forth, otherwise, I’m happy to simply state some disagreement, point to some references, and move on.
I think my best argument-fu move lately has been taking the verbage Lana/Paul use about “targeting” just one racial group, and asking them to answer that question – why do they advocate just for racial privilege for one group, not all of them. I doubt either of them will ever really understand how silly they are to accuse me of racism, nor will they understand the ironic nature of my riposte, but oh well, it’s fun sometimes.
I guess it just might be that everything to be said has been said – no new arguments have come up for quite a while. Laudig still insists that there is some legal parallel to other military occupations, without getting over the tough nut of the international recognition of the Provisional Government and the Republic of Hawaii…scott and Paul are still struggling with the idea of maintaining their wishes for an independent Hawaii without requiring severe ethnic cleansing or disenfranchisement of residents of Hawaii…Keiki Watson has had the most interesting discussion lately, regarding the Great Mahele, and whether or not “Tenant” meant kanaka maoli tenants as a group, or specific individual tenants of land to be divided. I believe I understand where his confusion lies, and I suppose reasonable minds could differ on the interpretation of some of the text.
Anyway, I still try to pay some attention. Hope I don’t disappoint my fans :).
Hey Jere, nothing to do with the article, but I noticed you aren’t pushing your POV as hard as you once were. Any reason why?
I’m not? :)
I guess it depends on what context – on Wikipedia, I’m always trying to strive for NPOV. On scott’s blog, I think I’ve gotten it down to a dull roar with Paul and Lana, and actually had some pretty good back and forth with Keiki Watson. I’m being more selective with who I bother to reply to, I suppose.
I think another part of it is that people aren’t really baiting me…most of my conversations only get thick when there is some back and forth, otherwise, I’m happy to simply state some disagreement, point to some references, and move on.
I think my best argument-fu move lately has been taking the verbage Lana/Paul use about “targeting” just one racial group, and asking them to answer that question – why do they advocate just for racial privilege for one group, not all of them. I doubt either of them will ever really understand how silly they are to accuse me of racism, nor will they understand the ironic nature of my riposte, but oh well, it’s fun sometimes.
I guess it just might be that everything to be said has been said – no new arguments have come up for quite a while. Laudig still insists that there is some legal parallel to other military occupations, without getting over the tough nut of the international recognition of the Provisional Government and the Republic of Hawaii…scott and Paul are still struggling with the idea of maintaining their wishes for an independent Hawaii without requiring severe ethnic cleansing or disenfranchisement of residents of Hawaii…Keiki Watson has had the most interesting discussion lately, regarding the Great Mahele, and whether or not “Tenant” meant kanaka maoli tenants as a group, or specific individual tenants of land to be divided. I believe I understand where his confusion lies, and I suppose reasonable minds could differ on the interpretation of some of the text.
Anyway, I still try to pay some attention. Hope I don’t disappoint my fans :).