In various high-noise/low-signal Usenet newsgroups, one finds "debates" 
on "The Labor Theory of Value" and Karl Marx's ideas on the topic.  
 
The article that follows this foreward and introduction was written by 
Frederick Engels, closest friend to Karl Marx.  Engels, herein, 
addresses those who have trouble grasping Marx's statements on human 
labor and value.  It is well-argued and explains Marx's application of 
the theory of value in human economic history and the formulation of our 
modern capitalist mode of production.  
 
Upon reading this, it becomes clear that most of the net "debates" about 
"Marx's" theory of value bear zero resemblance to historic record.  
So-called net "debates" involve presuppositions on what the (labor) 
theory of value is and what Marx said about it.  
 
Once these strawmen are erected, then, as if in orgasmic revelation, the 
"debater" points to things like buggy-whips and/or mud-pies as glorious 
refutation -- "If labor makes value, how come my mud pies aren't worth 
anything!?" 
 
Most net-versions of the (labor) theory of value attributed to Marx are, 
of course, inventions.  This myth surrounding Marx and the (labor) 
theory of value seems to have grown to monumental proportions -- 
reminiscent of those who _swear_ there is a modem tax imminent, another 
timeless net myth.  
 
No doubt such posters are sincere.  But then the question arises: where 
are they getting this idea from? It seems to continually crop up, often 
worded the same way; is there some ill-informed text people are 
accessing somewhere?  Or does this myth simply feed on itself, spoken  
so many times in newsgroups people believe it true? ("Whatever I say 
three times is true", to quote the snark.) 
 
                                                  -- kkc (zodiac@io.org)