On 9/15/07, Dave Land <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Please tell me you didn't have to look that up. Or do you just have > > such contempt for your audience that you assume they don't understand > > the conversation that is taking place? > > Ronn's point seems to be that _you_ should have looked it up. > > My experience with Ronn on this list suggests that he knows exactly > what non-sequitur means without looking it up, but he likes to cite > his sources.
Quoting from the dictionary is not citing your sources, it is using an idiotic rhetorical tool. > I have no beef with Ronn, but I'm no fan of spelling or > grammar-weenie behavior, either. On the other hand, you did spell non- > sequitur wrong and you used it improperly. I may have spelt wrong - a spelling mistake? on the internet? - but I certainly didn't use it improperly. > I think you may have meant non-starter, which is an expression some > use for something that is so wrong that it just won't happen. > > As to the topic at hand, If a world-class city like London wants to > ban private cars, it probably needs to take on the responsibility of > providing alternative transportation for those who simply cannot, for > health reasons, walk the distances required. Oh my God, really!? Martin _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
