Ant, John Carl: That's very gratifying to hear, Ant. We haven't really had much
> intercourse yet and I'm not absolutely positive of your integrity but this > is very reassuring. You seem like a good guy. > > Ant McWatt comments: > > John, is that a socially "good guy" (i.e. one of the boys at the bar?), an > intellectually "good guy" (i.e. someone who can make a good philosophical > argument?) or an artistically "good guy" (e.g. someone you feel that you > could riff with in your local jazz band?) > > Jc: nothing at all that specific. It was just a projection on my part based upon the fact that you are engaged in a philosophical discussion that is based upon a philosophy of morals. If you weren't a good guy, you'd probably be doing something else. > > Ant had then commented: > > Thirdly, if Horse has reprimanded you for posting off-line comments at MOQ > Discuss then you were almost doing something out-of-order. > > John Carl replied: > > Heh. well, yeah, probably. I remember the incident vaguely and there > wasn't any real ill-will in it. An honest mistake, such as yours. > > Ant McWatt comments: > > No John, you got it wrong yet again... There was no "honest mistake" > about me posting an off-line question from John McConnell. I simply don't > like being censored by Microsoft or anyone else for that matter especially > as we live in this so-called "haven of free speech" called the Western > world. The post to MD on this occasion was simply the way I got round > being censored and - by doing so - I purposively broke the social rule of > not posting off-line correspondence. The intellectual message that I had > for John took moral precedence over the latter social rule. > > I hope that is clear? > > Best wishes, > > > Clear. (see? you said "best wishes". You must be a good guy.) John Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org/md/archives.html
