-public-html
+www-archive
Sam Ruby wrote:
The third word is "strawman". It involves raising and addressing an
issue that bears only a superficial resemblance to the topic being
discussed.
That is not the definition of a strawman. A strawman is an argument
where one person misrepresents another's position so as to be easily
refuted.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
Leif Halvard Silli wrote:
Maciej Stachowiak 2009-01-31 22.55:
I don't think your description is in conflict with what I stated.
The one part I disagree with is that any raised issue that at least three
people agree is an issue must be flagged in Working Drafts. I do think
it is often a good idea to mark especially controversial issues, or
especially pervasive and clearly unresolved issues, but I think doing
this as a matter of course may create a lot of work. I would say instead
that we should exercise reasonable judgment about when a flag in the
draft is warranted.
Stating his disagreement. (Conditionally permitted by Sam.)
P.S. I know you asked people not to state their agreement on the
list. But since your email was a reply to me, but since your email was a
reply to me and since I think it is helpful to the group to see people
coming to agreement, I chose to make an exception.
Claiming to have stated his agreement.
Sam:
Keep a watch out for these three, and call them out when you see
them.
I see a "strawman".
Sorry, that's not a strawman either. Maciej was just pointing that the
he largely agreed with what Sam wrote, except for one small part.
--
Lachlan Hunt - Opera Software
http://lachy.id.au/
http://www.opera.com/
