On Sun, May 28, 2006 at 09:22:10PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Once he has broken faith, nothing coming from that source can > > be accepted, since the source is now tainted. Any information flow > > with that origination is tainted, and since you offer the same > > statements, without any form of untainting that is visible, I think > > you are rapidly approaching the untrusted relay category. > > What I don't see is what exactly the scam *was*. > > It seems to me that you are saying that presenting an ID which should > *scream* to anyone paying the least attention "this is not a > government ID", has, ipso facto, lied. > > But no, they haven't. They haven't forged, or been dishonest.
In fact (as I understand it) Martin willingly showed his real ID to
anyone who didn't accept his Transnational Republic ID. That doesn't
sound all that dishonest to me - surely if the intent was to deceive he
wouldn't have shown any real ID?
bma
--
Benjamin A'Lee - <http://bmalee.eu/~bma/>
Secretary, TermiSoc - <http://termisoc.org/>
"Graphs of higher degree polynomials have this habit of doing unwanted
wiggly things." -- From a Cambridge maths lecture.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
