-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Pamela McCorduck wrote: > On Aug 8, 2007, at 9:09 PM, Nicholas Thompson wrote: >> I think there is a difference between a political discussion in >> which we all ideologically flatulate one one where we, as experts, >> contribute to clarifying a problem that the rest of the world >> totally misunderstands. >> >>> From a technical stand point, does the idea of a IT-Judiciary >>> make sense??? > > Nick, of course there's a difference, and I apologize for falling > momentarily onto a path that was more vent than discussion. Your > question stands.
I disagree. In fact, I think Nick's equation of expressing one's political/ideological views with flatulence demonstrates Nick's egotism. Not everyone thinks their opinions are purely factual, as apparently Nick does. Experts have just as much gas as ordinary people. In fact, most "experts" (particularly those who refer to themselves as "experts") seem to have WAY more GAS than ordinary people. So, an IT-Judiciary would essentially be a bunch of pompous ... [cough] ... experts with more flatulence than a normal political/ideological discussion amongst non-experts. - -- glen e. p. ropella, 971-219-3846, http://tempusdictum.com The United States is a nation of laws: badly written and randomly enforced. -- Frank Zappa -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFGu1CLZeB+vOTnLkoRArcAAJ9qZSnOXkUre+PFa09fSrqhVOuOjACfbLh4 uJP+a52SnkXx14fvFWsT+E0= =gH39 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
