On Wed, 2007-07-18 at 22:57 -0400, tedd wrote: > At 7:05 PM -0500 7/18/07, Larry Garfield wrote: > >On Wednesday 18 July 2007, tedd wrote: > > > >> And just because they do, doesn't make it any less accurate either. I > >> don't care if Hitler agreed with me, there is a fundamental wrongful > >> act of taking something that is not yours regardless of what you, and > >> others, may call it. > > > >First "Hitler and the Nazis"[1] reference. You lose! Thanks for playing. :-) > > > >[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_Law > > > > Wow, that was interesting. > > But I can't help but think that if someone wanted to use the worst > person imaginable to define a limit, I think Hitler would be it. > > As such, Godwin's law really doesn't apply here. I wasn't calling or > inferring anyone or the other side as Hitler. I was using Hilter an > extreme to make my point that if even he sided with *me*, it wouldn't > lessen my argument -- guilt by association does not apply here. And, > that was my point. Actually Godwin's law does indeed apply here *lol*. > It's like defining good and evil -- at some point in the conversation > someone is going to use the words God or satan. > > But, if you read further about Godwin's law, you can see that one can > abuse the law by miscasting the event, as you just did. > > So, Bzzzt! You lose! Better luck next time. :-) > > Lot of interesting stuff out there, huh? It's called Quirk's exception... and it applies quite well here. Cheers, Rob. -- ........................................................... SwarmBuy.com - http://www.swarmbuy.com Leveraging the buying power of the masses! ........................................................... -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
