Mr Welsh the ancient coin dealer seems to be getting a trifle flustered and a trifle forgetful. Again he's posted a text on his blog without a title ('______________', Tuesday, September 24, 2013), but then since it does not say very much, it's perhaps appropriate. The first half of his post is merely a whole text of mine cut and pasted into his own blog.Apart from that, there is not a lot of meat here, basically all those words boil down to just two points, as follows:
1) Mr Welsh accuses me of a "lie" about what constitutes a licit market.
(but then misrepresents what I said - the question is whether deliberately and provocatively, or perhaps he really does not understand?) I stand by what I said.
2) Then he tries to dissect the meaning of the word "licit". The polemecist however applies his own (I suspect made-up) definition of the term, narrowing its use (see the post below where I try to explain it to him and his fellow naysayers one more time). He quite clearly is wrong.
The rest of his overlong text, dodging the issue as always, is another (continued) misleading ad hominem attack by the ACCG officer. Presumably he is of the opinion that by this hounding, he will grind me down and avoid actually addressing the issues raised by what he wrote earlier.
Vignette: Getting deeper and deeper into the mire of his own arguments (the last two in the series are not a pretty sight).
UPDATE 25.09.13:
This post of Mr Welsh now has a title ("Putting a Title on it") original, eh?
No comments:
Post a Comment