> From: Andrew Crystall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> On 1 Jul 2002 at 0:23, J. van Baardwijk wrote:
> 
> > At 17:08 30-06-2002 -0500, The Fool wrote:
> > 
> > > > No, the burden of proof on statements like that is ON YOU. If you
> > > > want to SPECULATE, because that is what you're doing, on future
> > > > technology, then you must prove the viability of these things.
> > >
> > >So what you are saying is that you can't or won't back up your
> > >statements about world population / etcetera in any way with any
> > >data, and are calling for massive genocide, along the lines the
> > >holocaust.
> > 
> > I do not recall reading that anywhere in Andy's (or anyone else's)
> > posts.
> 
> Quite. What I ACTUALLY said was that I'd not like to see the 
> sustained world population go much more than 50% above it's current 
> level. Lower would be nice, but is highly unlikely.
> 
> > > > And bringing a lot nearer the day I unsubscribe from Brin-L for
> > > > good, because the list is pushing that way.
> > >
> > >And sounding just like that Kirsten person just before she went.
> > 
> > Quit it, guys. If you want to discuss this topic like civilised
> > adults, then you are more than welcome to do so on-list. Do not be
too
> > pushy about precise facts; we are merely exploring an idea here, not
> > drawing up the fully-detailed and scientifically-100%-sound plans for
> > the actual project.
> 
> I'm sorry, I'm supposed to be civil with that piece of shit? No. If 
> you don't like my tone to him, your recourse is to ban me, nothing 
> under that will have ANY affect on what I call him.
>  
> > But please please please keep it civilised. If you feel a need to
> > resort to namecalling and dirt-throwing, take it off-list. Brin-L has
> > seen enough misery in the last few years.
> 
> Yes, and I remember WHY. Let's keep the Israel flamewar in mind here. 
> I bowed out of ther list for months because of that.
> 
> > Thank you for your help in keeping this list a nice place to be.
> 
> Time to unsubscribe then I guess. As I said, I've become 
> progressively more dissatisfied with Bein-L since the INCIDENT. Some 
> of you even know what I mean by that.
> 
> Oh, and we should never have let HIM on here in the first place. You 
> see him not giving his name as a curiosity, I see it as a threat to 
> the list. And I think given his behavoir while he's been on the list 
> that that has been FULLY justified.

pppp  l     oooo  n   n  k   k
p  p  l     o  o  nn  n  k  k
pppp  l     o  o  n n n  kkk
p     l     o  o  n n n  kkk
p     l     o  o  n  nn  k  k 
p     llll  oooo  n   n  k   k

Reply via email to