On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 08:04:45 -0500, Jay Belanger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Al Klein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >... >>>>>Really? The meaning of the adjective doesn't depend on the noun it >>>>>modifies? >> >>>> Not necessarily. >> >>>Not necessarily, but it can. >> >> Which doesn't support the argument that unfettered is the only way to >> apply it to software. > >It doesn't support a lot of things. If you were paying attention, I >was merely pointing out that your casual dismissal of that application >is wrong. Sorry, no, my "casual" dismissal of that application being the only one worth considering is correct. >Again, I was merely pointing out that your casual dismissal of the >current meaning of the phrase "free software" is wrong. >I'm sorry that you don't like the meaning of the phrase, but to insist >that the meaning you decide to give it is the meaning everyone must >agree to is controlling, not communication. Quite the contrary, I said that forcing everyone to accept only one definition of the phrase is wrong. >but given the way you use the language I use it correctly. >I can't be sure. I'm sorry. If English isn't your native language, perhaps we can find one we both understand. > In this case, an >argument against the opposing view was merely an argument to point out >the opposing view was wrong. It might have been, had you not misrepresented my view. -- It's back - http://www.webdingers.com/filelist.html _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
