>>"Ian" == Ian Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Manoj> Since you manage to forget context from message to message, I
Manoj> guess it makes a weird kind of sense that now you attribute
Manoj> statements like the above to your opponents.
Ian> No, Manoj, it's you who missed the context here.
Rubbish.
Ian> He said "...when there are no problems."
Ian> You said "That will never happen, therefore we should stop trying".
Ian> He said "That doesn't follow".
Full context:
Manoj> do we want to stop codifying every little thing?
Clint> When there are no more problems?
Manoj> Then we should stop right here, since that is an impossible goal.
Clint> That doesn't necessarily follow.
Manoj> Yes, it does. There are never going to be no problems.
I was asking if there was an exit criteria, and the proposed
exit criteria was an impossibility.
Ian> There'll always be wars and war crimes, does that mean we should stop
Ian> trying to put in place laws forbidding them?
False anology. We are talking about adding codicils to the
law, constantly finagling to it, not prosecuting violations of
current law.
manoj
--
He who enters his wife's dressing room is a philosopher or a
fool. Balzac
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
