[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: A possible GFDL compromise: a proposal

On 2003-09-21 21:15:25 +0100 Richard Braakman <dark@xs4all.nl> wrote:

No, that's not a logical conclusion. It's [...] slippery slope fallacy.

It's no less a fallacy than claiming "software" is controversial and worthy of special definition.

"Software" is not a controversial word in English (roughly inverse of "hardware" in one sense). Some people advocate a bizarre definition of it in order to further their agenda. If you're going to define common words just because someone objects to the normal meaning being used, you'll get some bozo that objects to the word "social" and claims it only applies to the welfare state. That's clearly ungood.

There's no evidence that all other words in the document lead to such
controversy, and no reason to suppose that we'll have to define them too.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. I could equally well state that there is no evidence that no other words in the document lead to such controversy with a subset of the population. While clearly true, that fact doesn't help anything either.

MJR/slef     My Opinion Only and possibly not of any group I know.
http://mjr.towers.org.uk/ gopher://g.towers.org.uk/ slef@jabber.at
 Creative copyleft computing services via http://www.ttllp.co.uk/

Reply to: