Re: non-free proposal (was Re: Questions to candidates)
On Wed, Mar 03, 2004 at 07:21:27PM +0000, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> I would say it as:
>
> "For those who understand, no explanation is necessary.
> For those who do not, none is worthwhile."
>
> I think it's not impossible that some (more) of the opponents could be
> made to understand why people might disagree with them. But I can't
> imagine any even theoretically possible scenarios where this would
> change their opinion, so there's no point wasting the effort.
I would say it as:
"This isn't about reasons, it's about being unreasonable."
--
Raul
Reply to: