"bjrutledge" said:
I am still puzzled by one thing. If there is no trace of "coachlowe," are we all sure that he ever existed? And if the virtual coachlowe doesn't really exist, can Nashorama be considered confrontational?
In other words, if you confront something that doesn't exist, is that really considered confrontational behavior, worthy of public scorn and social ostracism?
This thread is now becoming interesting. Of course, an initial post is only an excuse for many of us to develop differing philosophical positions that are often only tenuously related (if at all) to the subject of the original post. And so it is here.
I made the initial (plausible) assumption that behind the cyber-presence of "coachlowe" resided a real person of flesh-and-blood. I now make the initial assumption that so did many others at the time. With this assumption, it is clear that Nashorama's response might be considered by some to be aggressive and bellicose. But I think we can go further than this. Suppose we all knew that "coachlowe" was unreal; I argue that Nashorama's response can be still be considered (by some) to be aggressive and confrontational, even though there is now no human object against whom this attitude was directed.
And I have a second concern. The possibly non-existent coachlowe was the only person I have ever known (if I can indeed consider that I knew him, for the brief time I spent reading and replying to his post) who advertised himself as a healthy heterosexual. So now his disappearance alarms me. If healthy heterosexuals are disappearing at a rapid rate, who will be available to fill the ranks of the US military (I don't think gays can be trusted to keep quiet about their sexual orientation, in case of a future draft...)?
If he was non-existent, there is no cause for alarm. Cause for alarm can only exist if "coachlowe" was a real human being, young, male, and with US citizenship, who has in the interim period either expired or otherwise become ineligible to serve in the fine US armed forces. There is no evidence 1) that he was real and 2) that if he was real, he subsequently expired or became incapacitated. Thus we need not concern ourselves overmuch with USA's capacity to fight other imperialistic wars of aggression.
And also, what caused such a healthy person to disappear so quickly???
How about the hostile and confrontational response of other posters (assuming, of course, that he was and is real).