Salutatio Keith!
15-Apr-98, Keith Knapp wrote to Richard Meic
          Subject: !!!
 RM>> RM>> Define philosophy.  As it is you can ban anyone anytime as
 RM>> you RM>> please and some how interpret it as a violation of rule
 RM>> 0.  Paper RM>> tiger, that all. Remindes me of the UN.
 R>> The love of wisdom.
 KK> RM>Define wisdom.
 KK> I would think that for a Moderator of Philosophy (PhM?) the real
 KK> question is, what boundaries must be placed upon the love of
 KK> wisdom?
That would be a good one.
 KK> I'll leave aside the question of whether the Rev is moderating
 KK> with a light touch or no touch at all, but for the most part we
 KK> seem reasonably sane around here.
Perhaps.  Did you know I am belligerent?  ;)
 R>> Yes, indeed I could use my feed cut power in an arbitrary manner.
 R>> I don't see what your point is, though.
 KK> RM>My point is that your "rule 0" does nothing without any
 KK> indication of RM>exactly how you define "philosophy"... except
 KK> maybe to give you QUITE a RM>bit of "fudge room" should you decide
 KK> to remove someone (though, I do RM>doubt you WOULD do anything
 KK> like that).
 KK> If anything, I think the Rev is underusing his authority.  I could
 KK> do with fewer of the ad hominems and ad pongidems.
Well, he obviously has no intention of giving the echo over to someone
who would do the job and he has no intention of doing the job himself.
I just wonder why he is even here in the first place.
 Dicere...
 email address (vrmeic@nucleus.com) 
Richard Meic
--- Terminate 5.00/Pro 
---------------