Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Brian wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote in message ... Carl R. Stevenson wrote: some snippage We present more rational, compelling arguments, of course. Carl, with all due respect, "rational and compelling arguments" are in the head of the beholder. Then the words "rational" and "irrational" have no meaning. 1. Everyone here thinks they are being rational, unless they are being purposefully non-rational. (say Bruce for example, who is having fun baiting people - and even in his case, take note that when he is starting to be serious his spelling and grammar become correct) 2. You really aren't that far from the truth. 3. Insane people are exempt from all this. But there really aren't that many insane people. My rationale is that what is or isn't rational is based on the starting assumption or world view. If your basic assumption is that things should be simplified or to be made easier, then you would agree with a proposal such as the NCI proposal before the FCC. It is rational and compelling from that viewpoint. If you believe that simplification is not necessary or desirable, you are more likely to find the FISTS proposal rational and compelling. - Mike KB3EIA - |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|