On 10/26/05, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
On 10/26/05, Anthony DiPierro wikispam@inbox.org wrote:
If an actual no-foolin' expert dissents, then there isn't consensus in
the
first place.
And if an actual no-foolin' expert supports the consensus?
Supports what consensus? I just said, if people can't come to a general agreement, then there *is* no consensus. You seem to be mistaking majority with consensus.