"David Schwartz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Mike Meyer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Of course, you've dropped the real point, which is your own inabillity
>> to distinguish between, as you put it, "guns and arguments." You
>> always act as if every mention of a crime committed by someone other
>> than microsoft involved guns, even when most of them don't. You have
>> as yet to offer any explanation for that other than that you're
>> following MS's orders.
> Your sole evidence for this claim is that I once equated "theft" with
> force. Yes, you are correct that it's possible to steal something without
> using force. Even in this case, from context, it was quite clear that
> forceful theft was intended.
No, my evidence for this claim, as I've repeatedly pointed out, is
that *every* time someone compares MS with any other criminal
activity, you whine about "guns" and refuse to deal with the
issue. You've gone from claiming that you don't do this, to claiming
you only do this when people refer to guns, to ducking the issue.
> There is a fundamental category difference between the fundamental
> inter-personal wrongs of force and fraud and every other invented wrong.
> People are making a concerted attempt in this thread to obliterate that
> distinction, and I include you in those making that attempt.
Another straw man. I'm not trying to oblitarate that difference, I'm
trying to find out why you regularly ignore that difference for
everyone but MS. You respond by falsely claiming that you aren't doing
so, or by ducking the issue.
<mike
--
Mike Meyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/
Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
