On Sun, May 28, 2006 at 09:22:10PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > Manoj Srivastava <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes: > > > Once he has broken faith, nothing coming from that source can > > be accepted, since the source is now tainted. Any information flow > > with that origination is tainted, and since you offer the same > > statements, without any form of untainting that is visible, I think > > you are rapidly approaching the untrusted relay category. > > What I don't see is what exactly the scam *was*. > > It seems to me that you are saying that presenting an ID which should > *scream* to anyone paying the least attention "this is not a > government ID", has, ipso facto, lied. > > But no, they haven't. They haven't forged, or been dishonest. In fact (as I understand it) Martin willingly showed his real ID to anyone who didn't accept his Transnational Republic ID. That doesn't sound all that dishonest to me - surely if the intent was to deceive he wouldn't have shown any real ID? bma -- Benjamin A'Lee - <http://bmalee.eu/~bma/> Secretary, TermiSoc - <http://termisoc.org/> "Graphs of higher degree polynomials have this habit of doing unwanted wiggly things." -- From a Cambridge maths lecture.
Description: Digital signature