| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
Ian Jackson wrote:
In message , Cecil Moore writes Richard Clark wrote: Cecil Moore wrote: your analysis is correct but moot Is he stealing your style? "Moot" is an interesting word, Richard. From Webster's - "moot - 1. a: debatable, b: disputed" Have a look here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moot_hall I remember 'Moot Hall' from my days at primary school (some 60 years ago), learning about the Anglo-Saxons. I guess the word may possibly be associated with 'meet', ie a meeting hall where things were debated. However, my Anglo-Saxon is a bit rusty (not much call for it these days). Cecil was using "moot" in its legal sense: that a point had become irrelevant, or no longer needed to be decided because of a change in circumstances. Or at least, Cecil tried to claim that a point made by Keith had become moot. But Keith disputed that... and so it rumbles on. -- 73 from Ian GM3SEK |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| The power explanation | Antenna | |||
| again a few words of explanation | General | |||
| again a few words of explanation | Policy | |||
| Explanation wanted | Antenna | |||
| New ham needing explanation on radios | General | |||