First of all, I didn't personally attack you....I said you're annoying in that you continually try to persuade the fans of the band to believe that because you're not a fan, we should likewise, not be fans of the music.  I find that terribly annoying, hence not an attack, but rather a personal opinion.  Something you keep saying we should all validate of yours, so I respectfully maintain my rights to my own.   I also did not address anything other than exactly what you said....it needs no clarification.  Lastly, as to your last sentence included in this e-mail....why do you seem to think that there is some sort of debate to be won here?  This is music we're discussing here...music!  Music is an art form, music is a relative art form....we're not debating the right or wrong of the death penalty here....it's not like you can say....well the music is bad because...blah blah blah....a! nd convince me you're right and I'm wrong.  There IS no right or wrong about MY OWN preference to music....the simple fact is, I like it...how much you dislike it has absolutely NO effect on my opinion of the music.  You can TRY to analyize the hell out it all you want, but your continual arguments to try to prove you're "right" about it are just that much more annoying.  Yes, annoying....I stand by that assessment.

In a message dated 11/6/01 12:04:19 AM Eastern Standard Time, Marc_Levitt@brown.edu writes:

To Veronica and Leigh:  Personal attacks do nothing to support your case.
As a matter of fact, they damage it because they detract from what otherwise
might be interesting points.  I have managed to see past your insults and
realize that you have not read my statements closely enough.  Rather than
take the time to analyze what I've said, it seems you have lashed out
indiscriminately.  Not the best way to win an argument.  I must admit that
the above two lines are equally ad hominem and do nothing to support my own
cause.  But I already argued my case and, given that (most of) the responses
have addressed things I never said, I cannot possibly hope to satisfactorily
respond to them.  I stand by my previous e-mails if anyone cares to
reexamine them, and I will address a couple interesting things that were
said.  (In the meantime: if you really don't want to hear opinions contrary
to your own, then that's your decision.  But shouldn't exposure to differing
opinions sharpen your view of your own?  A challenge to your thought
shouldn't be regarded as an insult, but as a chance to clarify why you think
the way you do.)