Subject:
|
Re: From Harry Browne
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 28 Nov 2000 04:01:38 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1063 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John DiRienzo writes:
> FUT lugnet.off-topic.useless-annoyance
Are we to understand, then, that a posting in disagreement with your view is
nothing but an annoyance? If so, then please come out and state it clearly.
If not, please explain what you mean, and while you're at it let us know why
you're annoyed that someone pointed out an apparent inconsistency
in your post. Namely, I was seeking clarification of the seeming disparity
between your assertion (correct me if I'm wrong) that blame implies fault and
the definition you yourself cited, which indicates that blame does not
necessitate fault.
Dave!
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: From Harry Browne
|
| FUT lugnet.off-topic.use...-annoyance "Dave Schuler" <orrex@excite.com> wrote in message news:G4osvM.Br7@lugnet.com... (...) yet. (...) blame" as: (...) (24 years ago, 28-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
279 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
