[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ga-full] Use of "loon"
No. I object to the whole thing.
If I can't have that, I vote for the shortest list of criteria possible on
the grounds that the less time wrangling about challenges and such the
more time for other stuff.
And I don't accept the sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander
argument. Two wrongs don't make a right. Those who oppose this policy
should rise above it, not invoke it. And if it's to be invoked by anyone,
the fewer grounds available the better.
On Thu, 17 Feb 2000, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
> So far, every single message I have had suggests that calling Joe Baptista
> a loon is language that should cause the utterer's suspension from the list.
> If that's a common opinion on the list, I will modify my judgment criteria
> Note that the revised judgment criteria will also include a number of other
> words formerly tolerated; they are (in my judgment) weaker than
> "horse-shitters", but stronger than "loon".
> Is that OK with everyone?
> Harald Tveit Alvestrand, EDB Maxware, Norway
> This message was passed to you via the email@example.com list.
> Send mail to firstname.lastname@example.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
A. Michael Froomkin | Professor of Law | email@example.com
U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA
+1 (305) 284-4285 | +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax) | http://www.law.tm
-->It's warm here.<--
This message was passed to you via the firstname.lastname@example.org list.
Send mail to email@example.com to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html