LMS wrote:
This is a bit off the topic, but it came up and I can't let it pass. KQ said recently that Cunctator is the project's *conscience*. Perhaps KQ was just trying to be nice, but I think that is actually unfair to the rest of us, who like to think we have a principled approach to the
project
as well. It also accords Cunc respect as somehow *the* representative of a *particularly* moral point of view, to whom the rest of us ought to pay special heed--I disagree with that and I enjoin you not to accord *any* one person such special respect. (I'm not sure KQ meant to imply all
this
by "conscience of the project," and I also doubt, in his reasonableness and modesty, that Cunc would reject the description when cashed out as I have done, but I just want this to be clear.)
eh, well, no I didn't mean all that, though I guess it was all implied by my sloppy writing. :-) All I meant was that Cunc, of all of us, seems most concerned with abuses of authority. I wouldn't like to appoint anyone an 'authority' on anything, and certainly I like to think of people as generally principled.
kq
koyaanisqatsi@nupedia.com writes:
All I meant was that Cunc, of all of us, seems most concerned with abuses of authority.
We're all concerned with abuses of authority. Cunc merely has a different definition to everyone else.
On Fri, 2002-10-25 at 14:33, Gareth Owen wrote:
koyaanisqatsi@nupedia.com writes:
All I meant was that Cunc, of all of us, seems most concerned with abuses of authority.
We're all concerned with abuses of authority. Cunc merely has a different definition to everyone else.
Oh, really. How does my definition seem to differ from everyone else's?
The Cunctator cunctator@kband.com writes:
Oh, really. How does my definition seem to differ from everyone else's?
You've been the sole voice of objection on so many issues upon which literally everyone else on the list agrees, that I'm amazed you even have the gall to ask
On Fri, 2002-10-25 at 18:52, Gareth Owen wrote:
The Cunctator cunctator@kband.com writes:
Oh, really. How does my definition seem to differ from everyone else's?
You've been the sole voice of objection on so many issues upon which literally everyone else on the list agrees, that I'm amazed you even have the gall to ask
Name the issue on which I have been the sole voice of objection, rather than the most vociferous.
You might want to try toning down the heightened rhetoric.
Gareth Owen wrote:
The Cunctator wrote:
Oh, really. How does my definition [of abuse of authority] seem to differ from everyone else's?
You've been the sole voice of objection on so many issues upon which literally everyone else on the list agrees, that I'm amazed you even have the gall to ask
I don't know that he defines it differently from everybody else. I would say that he's more *sensitive* to abuse of authority. This is not necessarily praise; you would argue that he's *overly* sensitive. But I think that it's a fair characterisation of the difference.
-- Toby
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org