> From: Erik Reuter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > On Sun, Jun 09, 2002 at 09:04:58PM -0500, The Fool wrote: > > > From: Erik Reuter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > On Sun, Jun 09, 2002 at 08:21:53PM -0500, The Fool wrote: > > > > 5. > > > > > > Okay, I say 6, you say 5. That's not a big discrepancy, so let's call > > > that issue settled. > > > > I was grading your statement about guns. > > Which was equivalent to yours. So a 5. > > I take your lack of disagreement as acceptance of a 1 for B). > > So, on the issue of speech, where the worst injury is a bit of frayed > nerves, we have a 5. On the issue of guns, which kill and maim when > used irresponsibly, we have a 1. Now it is probably just my thick skull > again, but this does not seem consistent to me.
I rated _your_ statement on guns. I did not rate any of *my* statements. I am not playing your little numbers game.
