An initial non-ecumenical elocution...

I seem to have (unfortunately) a lesser interest in public essays rather than face to face dialogue, which provides for a far more elaborate debating style. Facial expression and subtle (and of course sometimes not so subtle) body language executed during a friendly debate can offer a resounding advantage over one's "opponent". Some would argue that pure writing provides for a far more reasonable debate, where one must place far more thought into the exactitude of their wording rather than bullying their adversary with physical imposition. This point is hardly arguable. My difficulty comes in keeping it friendly . Without the ability to convey a friendly attitude while offing my point of view I am easily lost in a vast sea of lashing anger from my rival. Since much of my discourse is (occaisionally!) tongue-in-cheek, extremely important emotions automatically conveyed in person are completely lost in its textual equivalent. The older internet community's answer to this is to convey emotion by typing the acual emotion encased in "greater that - less than" brackets. As an example , , . Newer generations of the internet savy have used "smiley's" but good lord! who can possibly keep track of and memorize the abundance of intricate keystrokes. Thus we are often left wallowing in dry textual fact, or completely misreading the implied tone of most writers.

And so, work beckons and I am forced to abandon my semi-rant at this point.

Have a good day ya'll!!

Rick