Re: Substitute for s1*0

[David Kastrup]

"Trevor Daniels" <address@hidden> writes:

> No.  Didn't I list <> as an possibility?  The goal being to find the
> consensus solution.  You have a firm opinion about what is best;
> others disagree.

No, they don't.  Not a single reasoning has been countered.  They just
don't like it.  You are looking for a compromise about an idiom, but the
whole point of an idiom is that it is all you need.  That's what makes
it simplify things.

If you have parents with different world views, will they compromise by
teaching their children that man was created by God and women by
evolution?  The point of a world view is to streamline things.  The
compromise will be that they don't talk to their children.

> But this isn't David's project (or Graham's either); it's a community
> project.  People downing tools or putting on coats or otherwise
> resorting to extortion doesn't help.

It does not matter what metaphers are used.  My proposal was rejected,
and any further discussion about that is damaging to the project.

Let it drop already.  Nothing good will come of it.

-- 
David Kastrup