Again, while I concur in the asssessment of the oath as a really, really stupid idea, claims have been made in this thread that the ejected attendees had their rights violated. That erroneous statement does raise a legal issue.
An example of you waltzing into a thread and grasping onto some small part of the situation being discussed, propounding your opinion on it as if it were scripture and then dismissing all us unruly children to go out and play? Do you ever do anything else?
Enjoy,
Steven
I’d dispute your characterization of my posts for starters, and I’d be interested to see you cite an example.
Further, I’ve never deliberately lifted an opponent’s argument out of context to make it look like I’ve won a point (I’ve occasionally done it to make a joke, but that’s it). Which is pretty plainly what I was asking for an example of in my last post.
But more to the point: out of all the issues I raised in my last post, this is the thing you seize on?
Looks like instead of signing an oath beforehand they now just ask you to take an oath AT the event:
http://slate.com/id/2108852/