Author: Mike Byrne
Date: 22:03:28 09/09/03
Go up one level in this thread
On September 09, 2003 at 03:53:11, Jeroen van Dorp wrote: >On September 09, 2003 at 02:37:45, Roger D Davis wrote: > > >>You said, "from the discussion I can conclude that the legal status of such a >>program is unclear." In other words, it's questionnable... > > >No, questionable isn't unclear. > >Questionable refers to things with a dubious character. Unclear refers to a >situation in which is simply not clear what the status exactly is. > >The charter tells us that dubious, shady things shouldn't be promoted or posted >here, not things of which it is not clear what the legal status is. > >For the record, I didn't speak out about the status of the aforementioned >program, I spoke out about the way Mike tried to force the outcome of an ongoing >discussion. > >If the ongoing discussion is about the desirability to discuss and link to >illigal programs, the charter is clear. If the ongoing discussion is about the >fact _if_ something is illegal or not, and doubts are numerous, the charter >isn't clear - and so a moderator should be restrictive in mixing and threatening >to delete or end a discussion. > >That was at least _my_ point. And Mike disagreed with my assessement. And I >disagree with his disagreement of my disagreement with him. You see? > >J. I never got that from your original post - but that's ok.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.