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

Re: Just a single Question for the Candidates

On Sat, Mar 06, 2004 at 11:22:06AM +0000, Peter Samuelson wrote:
> [Andrew Suffield]
> > "We can't be sure whether this orange-haired person likes to eat
> > babies or not. He probably does, lock him up".
> Not that a baby-eating example isn't a bit loaded ... but ok, I'll run
> with it:
> "Many orange-haired people have been observed to eat babies.  Here we
> have an orange-haired person, and babies keep disappearing.  While
> there is still some argument on the point of whether or not it is
> acceptible to keep losing our babies, most of us agree that this is a
> Bad Thing.  Maybe it is time to take steps to keep the babies away from
> the orange-haired person, you know, see if that makes a difference."

I think you just made my point better than I did. I don't want to live
in that society. It was s/gamers/orange hair/ and s/violent/like to
eat babies/, btw.

> > > Is this just a game to you?  Did you think there were judges on the
> > > sidelines keeping notes about who was using the wrong standard of
> > > proof, or making unwarranted assumptions?  It's not a game to the ones
> > > who started this thread.
> > 
> > "It's not a game, therefore the rules (of logic) do not apply".
> More like - there comes a point where calling people on the carpet for
> what amount to technicalities is counter-productive and useless.

So an invalid argument is just a technicality? It's okay to be wrong?

  .''`.  ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
 : :' :  http://www.debian.org/ |
 `. `'                          |
   `-             -><-          |

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: