| |||||||||||||
Not so fastNot so fastPosted Jun 19, 2008 21:47 UTC (Thu) by nix (subscriber, #2304)In reply to: Not so fast by PaXTeam Parent article: Stable kernel 2.6.25.7 released
The dictionary definition of a straw man argument is arguing !A and then concluding !B, where A is not a precondition of B. What I'm doing is considering slight variations on what you're discussing in order to figure out if *they* have any merit (since your claim of some peculiar form of non-malicious dishonesty is incoherent I haven't wasted any time considering that case at all). My apologies for *daring* to consider tangential cases at all. I wasn't aware I wasn't allowed to discuss such things. (Your claims of 'exposure' reek of paranoia. In fact pretty much everything you've posted reeks of paranoia.)
(Log in to post comments)
Not so fast Posted Jun 20, 2008 1:37 UTC (Fri) by zakalwe2 (guest, #50472) [Link] >>since your claim of some peculiar form of non-malicious dishonesty is incoherent No honey, your ass doesn't look big in that at all.
|
|||||||||||||