On Fri, 25 Jun 2004 14:13, Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Jun 25, 2004 at 12:57:08AM +0200, David N. Welton wrote: > > I don't know what it is about your style of > > comunication, but it reminds me more of "debate club" than rational > > discussion in search of a common ground. > > The implication here presumably being that illogical and invalid > arguments are "rational discussion in search of a common ground". > > I've never seen a debate club with rules other than that all arguments > must be valid, and you have to let the opposition have time to speak > (the latter of which obviously doesn't apply to mailing lists).
"All arguments must be valid" is a fine rule if you want to have arguments for fun. If you want to achieve something (such as developing a large software project) then there are many arguments which are stupidly bogus. This has been demonstrated many times on this list. As for the opposition having time to speak, once again that's nice if you are just arguing for the fun of it but not if you are trying to get something done. This list has many examples of people who do no work but who feel that they deserve a right to be heard. -- http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/postal/ Postal SMTP/POP benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
