SUO: Re: Meta*Question About Example In KR Book
<HTML = Hit Them More Last>
Again, I did not personally question anybody's right to introduce
any topic that he or she may wish, so you need not have resorted
to this Pro-Forma "They Hit Me First" Defence. Of course, the
Authorised Chair has issued Sanctions that cover that rather
well-known loop-hole. But these red herrings aside, I feel
certain you are cognizant of the higher Principle involved,
as it has to do with a particular "Form Of Equivalence".
As a Point Of Information, however -- not that I am personally
concerned, I know you understand, about the details, but for the
sake of the Principle thereby exemplified, positively or negatively,
as the case may be, as I fully believe, and have said so on numerous
occasions that anyone ought to be free to do the same as you have done --
my present information is that the subject line in question was initiated
elsewhere. It appears so far as I know to have been here:
And it seems that your reply to a subsequent post:
that you replied to here:
somehow got copied to the Main SUO List, at this point:
And the Main, as you are perfectly cognizant to know,
is under the Authorised Ban of a very strict Constraint
to Demonstrate the Relevance, as "Defined" I guess from
moment to moment, on the basis of some Rule I guess, of
each posting thereto.
I assume that this was the ordinary brand of human frailty to which
anyone's typographical thumb will be susceptible on occasion, still,
I think that its stretches Jim's rule a bit far, and I am sure that
he has already said as much, to screw these thumbs as the scapegoats
for your continuing complicity in the indiscretions of others, and
I daresay even contributing to the deliquency of those for whom
you ought by your years to be the very paragon of a Model (q.v.)
Thank you for your recognizance of this issue,
and all your conscientiousness in its respect.
John F. Sowa wrote:
> Good question:
> > could you please say a few words as a Guide for the Perplexed on behalf
> > of why the Authorised Chair's "Constraint", cited below, which I am
> > sure that he intended to apply to the whole Target Audience with
> > equal force of application and justice under the rule of law,
> > should apply to others, but not to you, or else, as another
> > alternative that you may elect to choose for your liberal
> > deliveration, why it should apply to none, if not to you.
> My answer is simple: I did not initiate any of these discussions.
> I was simply answering questions that were posed to me or objections
> to my previous responses.