[Foundation-l] Trademarks

[Thomas Dalton]

2008/11/25 Anthony <wikimail at inbox.org>:
> On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 12:10 PM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> > Well, like I said, my purpose wasn't to make a point, but to ask
>> questions.
>> > I've learned better than to try to make points in this particular e-mail
>> > forum.
>>
>> Your second question was something of a leading question. It came
>> across as if you were trying to make a point.
>>
>
> Well, like I said, I was trying to clarify what exactly it was about his
> statement that I didn't understand.  To ask a good question, you kind of
> have to make a point, don't you?  (Was that last question I just asked a
> question, or a point?  What about that one?  Or that one?)

It depends on the question, but a request for clarification does often
require you to make a point first in order to explain the confusion. I
guess it's all about how you word it (I'm really not the one to be
giving advice on tact, though!).

> On the other hand, maybe Mike misspoke and can correct
> himself, or maybe I misunderstood him and he can clarify.

I think that's the most likely explanation. Mike doesn't always
explains things well to us laymen, he probably knows exactly what he
means and he's probably right, but we just don't have the prior
knowledge required to understand his comment. I guess lawyers aren't
used to a bunch of geeks checking up on them constantly!

> When I was in college I quite often asked professors questions which pointed
> out seeming contradictions in what they were saying, and I never did so to
> make a point.  Sometimes it turns out the professor was wrong.  Sometimes
> they misspoke.  Sometimes I misunderstood them.  In all three cases there
> are possible positive outcomes to my having asked the question.  Yes, there
> are also possible negative outcomes, but we're supposed to assume good
> faith, aren't we?

Indeed, asking questions is always good, it's just a matter of how you ask them.