Alexander Terekhov wrote:
Miles Bader wrote:
John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Rjack is a troll. There is no point in trying to make sense of what he
writes.
FWIW, Mike Cox is a troll too, though perhaps a slightly more subtle one
than bumblers like rjack or wigged out nutcases like Terekhov.
Greetings to Mike Cox. Troll brigade growing!!! Oh poor GNUtians.
regards,
alexander.
--
"The revolution might take significantly longer than anticipated."
-- The GNU Monk Harald Welte
When replying to a legal argument or belief supported by
reference to applicable legal principle or citation to case
precedent, attacking the character of the person advancing the
argument i.e. calling them a "troll" renders the reply irrelevant.
You must base your reply upon citation to appropriate legal
principle or case law that refutes the original sources.
Attempting to refute rational argument utilizing ad hominen
attack implies no reasonable reply is available.
People participating in this forum are obviously capable of
checking cited legal authorities for themselves. Denigrating the
character of someone citing to a legal resource does nothing to
disprove the content of the resource. Appealing to base emotional
reaction instead of urging rational thought should be left to
political campaign managers
jack
_______________________________________________
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
