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

Re: Analysis of the ballot options

On Mon, Jun 21, 2004 at 12:00:58AM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 20, 2004 at 10:59:44AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > > Andreas made an ill-formed proposal which the project secretary
> > > rejected for this ballot, and refused all suggestions about how it
> > > should be properly formed. He appears to hold a grudge, I'm not sure
> > > why.
> > 
> > Ah, never retain from a ad-hominem attacks, eh?
> Oh, come on. That was not an argument, therefore it cannot *possibly*
> be an instance of argumentum ad hominem.

Andreas didn't say "argument", he said "attack".

This is a tangent, though. Let's cut it.

     smog  |   bricks
 AIR  --  mud  -- FIRE
soda water |   tequila
 -- with thanks to fortune

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: