Uberproper Use of Subject Lines

brunians at brunians.org · 24 May 2010, 16:49 · from 2010-May.txt.gz

This is the message as the crawl holds it, before anything here touched it. What the conversation shows has been through ingest: transfer encodings decoded, attachments dropped, quote markers repaired, and the archiver’s ? resolved into quotation marks and dashes. Those repairs are judgements and some of them are wrong, which is what this page is for. Email addresses are obscured here as they are everywhere else on the site, so it is before our repairs rather than byte for byte.

From: brunians at brunians.org (brunians at brunians.org)
Date: Mon, 24 May 2010 12:49:00 -0400
Subject: (urth) Uberproper Use of Subject Lines
In-Reply-To: <4BFAACEE.2050105 at io.com>
References: <mailman.7580.1274414864.5093.urth-urth.net at lists.urth.net>
	<4BF67A69.6010706 at verizon.net> <4BF69242.9090304 at io.com>
	<4BF69FD2.5060703 at gmail.com> <4BFA3F31.60805 at io.com>
	<39de58ac87ed288fae36a612c71be800.squirrel at brunians.org>
	<AANLkTimasI-I56-mJqq1uO808jz_LqvGBkbuMuLwRCHA at mail.gmail.com>
	<4BFA9822.9060700 at gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimg3xv457gTGzzLVipXyFkXTbrMWjSh6xgv58Kr at mail.gmail.com>
	<afbc87f448d6e7b87bed79ea93b50ea5.squirrel at brunians.org>
	<AANLkTimSSlj2NU7egl8PgLMYpSCXkMOTo0bMpocKYKw8 at mail.gmail.com>
	<0d4879f06c8cf2df20e22f08ae807f91.squirrel at brunians.org>
	<4BFAACEE.2050105 at io.com>
Message-ID: <1c7f3b993fe163dd43f83676d8d6c8c9.squirrel at brunians.org>

I can't make sense of this remark either.

As I have stated, I don't believe in anything supernatural. Everything
that is is natural. Some bits of nature are not well known or poorly
documented, or people don't believe the documentation anymore.

Also, I fail to see how condemning or approving of the mind-crackling
concept of voluntary enforcement has anything to do with maintaining
actual existence of the supernatural, and wish you would explain exactly
what you mean by that.

It seems to me that there is something missing from your second sentence.
Perhaps 'belief in' after 'maintaining'? If not, I really don't know what
to make of it.

.

> On 5/24/2010 11:29 AM, brunians at brunians.org wrote:
>> It is a contradiction in terms.
> ..
>
>> You can't have it both ways.
>
> Apparently you think you can, condemning voluntary enforcement while
> maintaining actual existence of the supernatural.
>
> --
> Jeff Wilson - jwilson at io.com
> IEEE Student Chapter Blog at
> < http://ieeetamut.org >
> _______________________________________________
> Urth Mailing List
> To post, write urth at urth.net
> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>

An unofficial mirror of a public mailing list · about & removal requests · download the archive · before the list · original archive at urth.net