chip@ateng.com (Chip Salzenberg) (11/26/89)
According to stodol@freja.diku.dk (David Stodolsky): >In fact, "no" votes are unrelated to the proposed group name and charter. In fact, groups placed badly get lots of "no" votes. Those placed well don't. If you placed your group badly, you'll get lots of "no" votes. Where is the punchline? >Reading of comments received with groupware "no" votes [...] >No votes often reflect misunderstanding, ignorance, or just not >being serious. Here's the punchline. "People voting against _my_ group are ignorant, joking, or just don't understand the situation." Yeah, right. -- You may redistribute this article only to those who may freely do likewise. Chip Salzenberg at A T Engineering; <chip@ateng.com> or <uunet!ateng!chip> "Did I ever tell you the Jim Gladding story about the binoculars?"
gall@yunexus.UUCP (Norm Gall) (11/26/89)
chip@ateng.com (Chip Salzenberg) writes: | According to stodol@freja.diku.dk (David Stodolsky): | >Reading of comments received with groupware "no" votes [...] | >No votes often reflect misunderstanding, ignorance, or just not | >being serious. | Here's the punchline. "People voting against _my_ group are ignorant, | joking, or just don't understand the situation." Yeah, right. Corollaries: poor logic--poor rhetoric nrg If you agree with me, you are obviously correct. If you disagree with me, you obviously misunderstood the question. -- "Philosophy is not the underlabourer of the sciences but rather their tribunal; it adjudicates not the truth of scientific theorizing, but the sense of scientific propositions." -- PMS Hacker