Charles Punch wrote: > Isaac Curtis wrote: > >>Bryan Tyson wrote: >> >>>On Wednesday 29 August 2001 21:32, Ron wrote: >>> >>> >>>>Isaac, >>>> >>>>My gast has been well and truly flabbered... >>>> >>>>Ron. >>>>(Feeling a little sadder after reading your post). >>>> >>>> >>>Ron's right. This guy is making a mockery of both the Linux community >>>and "social consciousness." >>> >>>*************************************************** >>>Powered by SuSE Linux 7.2 Professional >>>KDE 2.1.2 KMail 1.2 >>> >>>Bryan S. Tyson >>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>*************************************************** >>> >>> >>For the thousandth time... I gave a lot more options, people are just >>obsessing about stealing. I provided a bunch of more acceptable ways to >>do this, and Paul added one more. I still have to admit I find it sort >>of silly that people burn cd's, copy mp3's, and reuse software intended >>for one computer yet would lecture someone for stealing a book. A $40 >>book is three cd's, which is about 40 songs. So take your mp3 >>collection and divide it by forty to figure the equivalent of how many >>books you've stolen. I haven't stolen many books. >> >> - Isaac >> > > There are a few basic flaws in your reasoning that I must comment on. > (1.)There is no way for you to know that the people that have expressed > their belief that stealing is wrong are doing any of the things you've > mentioned above. (2.)I am a Christian, but I know that the concept of > Karmic law is a little more than lightning striking people who > transgress moral laws. (3.) Quantity has nothing to do with whether > something is wrong or not. If stealing a million books is wrong, then > stealing one is wrong as well.I will ask once more, do you think that > two (or more) wrongs make a right. What surprises me about seeing this > kind of post on this list, is not a lack of morals, but a lack of > logical progression in the arguments. All of the arguments in favor of > stealing are based on non-sequitur. One would think that someone who can > make logical progressions to do computer work, would be able to apply > those priciples to other areas. To those who complained about posting > replies to this thread on the list, I do this because some of the > replies I read were in agreement at least partially about stealing and > it is not only my moral obligation, but my logical obligation to address > this issue. If it were only a moral obligation (without reason), I would > concede and post off list. It is in the interest of clear communication > that I post this. If you prove to me that clear communication is > irrelevant to this list, I will apologize. > > ShalomOut > Chal > Elder PCUSA > Registered Linux user # 217118 > Chal I hear what you're saying about the logical arguments, but I'm also put in this really awkward place where I'm being made to defend the idea of stealing. This is what has driven this topic so far off topic that it seems inappropriate. I'm really drained because in attacking the concept of stealing everyone is allowed to ignore everything I was really saying. In demanding a logical defense of stealing you refuse to debate the other ideas that were put forward. I feel like it's at the point that if I keep defending myself I'm just making it worse, so I'm going to chill. I also want to agree very strongly with you that discussions, whatever level they descend to, are always more healthy to have openly on the list. There's nothing wrong with also talking privately on the side, but I really enjoy developing an understanding of people through open candid discussions, whether we're talking about the best window manager or the most appropriate way of acquiring books. Peace, Isaac
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
