Locke, thanks for the support you've offered since Stefan asked me
to stop posting, but to save myself from some potential embarrassment,
I want to make clear that Stefan's actions were not quite as arbitrary
as you've made them sound. Stefan seemed to first become irritated
with me after a particularly regrettable post
I made on the night of St. Patrick's day, after I had been drinking for
a while and had no business doing philosophy. In that post, I reacted
to Stefan's use of the term "valid concept" with quite a bit more
hostility than was warranted, and Stefan immediately voiced his displeasure.
Though I offered a weak apology at the time, I don't think it was one
of my better moments, and I can certainly understand why Stefan would
be upset with me about it. So one of Stefan's reasons for asking me to
leave was that he didn't enjoy my posts, and I can see where that comes
from; take that for what it's worth.
Stefan's other stated reason for asking me to stop posting was
that I consistently misrepresented or misunderstood his positions. I
don't see why I should be banned for misunderstanding, but
misrepresenting seems somewhat more objectionable. While I don't think
that I've been generally unreasonable in interpreting what Stefan has
said, his point does refer back to at least one past instance
where he has made this claim, and could conceivably also refer to the
large number of points where I've objected to something, and he's
attempted to show why my objections are not effective. To the extent
that such patterns are objectionable (I personally think they're a totally normal
part of philosophical debate; if every argument involved only a statement of a position and either a full acceptance or a correct rebuttal, I'd be out of a career!), this reason is also grounded in the
truth.
So I guess my point in posting this message is to say that
although I appreciate your defending me, I don't think you're correct
to say that Stefan only banned me for disagreeing. I think that Stefan
actually offered a perfectly fair defense against that claim when he pointed out
that I've been disagreeing with him for a long time, and it would seem
odd for him to suddenly decide that disagreeing is bad. Given that he
stated his reasons for asking me to leave, and given that we can trace
those reasons back to things that have happened on his board, I don't
see any pressing need to question Stefan's motives. Perhaps you would
argue that my offenses have not been objectionable enough to deserve a
request to stop posting, but I don't feel that I have any business
telling Stefan how he should feel about me. After all, this is his forum.
And
sorry for violating our agreement, Stefan, but I figured that this was
the kind of thing which warranted another post from me. Don't worry,
I'll be leaving now.