[MD] Virtually meaningful?

[Arlo Bensinger]

[Ron]
I would say that they are absolutely correct. I have to say that MoQ 
world is fun, when cartoon characters exist in every way just as much 
as us who can't have a good time?

[Arlo]
You're still making a distinction between "cartoon characters" and 
"us", suggesting a "real" and "fictional" divide. Perhaps you can 
clarify the difference for me by explaining how the "Ron" I know here 
is "real" but the "Aenea" who exists in Warcraft is "a cartoon 
character" ("not real"?)?

You are reading me as reducing both to a fictional (and hence trivial 
or frivolous) level. I'm suggesting the reverse, that both are 
elevated to "real" (and hence both have meaningful, important value).

[Ron]
why do you get so upset with the character of Platt? or, ..is that 
merely a role you play?

[Arlo]
No more and no less a role that any of the multiplicity of roles in 
which I am always awash. But, if you're asking whether or not 
"intolerance of charlatans" is a thread of continuity in value 
running throughout all (or most) of the personae that inhabit this 
corporeal host, then the answer is "yes".

By the way, Ron, may I pass along a book suggestion Ant had given me 
a while back? Read, "The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists" by Robert 
Tressell. (The full text is available online via Project Gutenberg if 
you have trouble getting a hardcopy: 
http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/3608) Therein you will meet a 
character so "like Platt" you will think that the character of 
"Platt" here is "really" the fictitious creation of a Tressellian scholar.