On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 2:44 PM, Thomas Dalton <[email protected]>wrote:
> 2009/10/20 Ryan Delaney <[email protected]>: > > This is a bizarre, but ancient, misunderstanding of IAR. All IAR means is > > that priority number one is doing what is right, rather than pedantic > > allegiance to a dictatorial interpretation of rules. Since IAR is not > itself > > a justification for anything, there is never any useful information added > by > > saying "I am invoking IAR." The only defense is "I did this because X" > where > > X is the reason that what you did was a good idea, so you might as well > skip > > to the end. Rather than saying "I am invoking IAR and I did this because > X", > > just say "I did this because X." > > It's not a misunderstanding, it is an understanding of how things > actually work in the real world. "X" will need to include an > explanation of why the usual rules don't apply (that may be obvious > from just explanation why what you did was a good idea), so it makes > sense to acknowledge from the beginning that you aren't following the > usual rules. > > Do you think a reason X that persuaded you that A was the right thing to do despite rule R that seems to forbid A would cause you to believe that the rules didn't apply, or would you need to be specifically reminded of that fact every time? - causa sui _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
