Dave
Whether or not I think it's relevant is not important. I don't think some of the
other problems are relevant, but they were suggested and it's a group project
so I included them. My objective is to include everything that anyone thinks
is relevant.
You said
>I feel that if Struan can
>give of his valuable holiday time to again restate the "academic"
>problem with the MoQ, we should reciprocate with by elevating it to a
>prominent position on the list.
That's a direct reference to the topic on MF so it ought to be included
in that thread.
Diana
>Diana
>
>As you said it's a question of relevance. If we are honestly looking for
>the "problems with the MoQ" as I said, unarguably poorly, in my essay on
>MoQ website years ago and in this post with a little more technical
>backup, the "strawman" criticism is a "red herring" argument that
>advocates "throwing the baby out with the bathwater " on the logic that
>the "baby" is dead because the "bathwater" is dirty. Do we honestly want
>to consider that logic? Another way of putting it. Is my tweeking
>Straun's nose really relevant to the focused discussion?
>
>3WD
>
>
>MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
>Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
>MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
>http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
