On Thu, Jul 22, 2004 at 04:08:00AM +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote: > On Wed, Jul 21, 2004 at 07:38:38PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > > Alternatively, a clean recapitulation of all this would be a good thing > > right > > now maybe. > > Quite possibly. I think that starting a clean thread for each problematic > clause should work, with an admonishment not to bring unrelated matters into > each relevant thread, to keep it clean.
Ok, will do that in the morning. > > Maybe it would be best that you don't try refuting all my points, but > > present your own interpretation from the start to the end ? > > OK, but what happens then? We're not exactly in front of a judge and jury > here -- there's no arbitrator to say whose interpretation is the most > persuasive... Well, i think that it would be easier than futile back and fort counter-arguing, which are sterile in the end. Friendly, Sven Luther
