|
|
|
|
|
|
by tptacek
2685 days ago
|
|
|
I have no idea where you're trying to take this. I'm saying that it's not productive to argue over the subtext of a hypothetical conversation neither of us are a party to. At some point your argument is going to have to boil down to "no, that person relating that story is not being fully truthful". Ok, that's a coherent argument, but not one I'm interested in having with you. |
|
|
I meant to reply to a comment that only provided as an information that somebody believed to be a token black hire. To this my point was that multiple non trivial interpretation were possible.
Now I realize I commented directly on the article so that I was in practice casting doubt on the content. This was a mistake, to be clear I trust the Edray Goins version of his own story.
A bit late to reply, but I feel it is an important distinction.