Oops! correction WAS: Re: OOPS! PowerCOBOL batch compiles
in [Cobol]
|
Prev: OOPS! PowerCOBOL batch compiles
Next: New to COBOL
From: Anonymous on 2 Aug 2010 08:11 In article <8bil48FgrnU1(a)mid.individual.net>, Pete Dashwood <dashwood(a)removethis.enternet.co.nz> wrote: >HeyBub wrote: [snip] >> Well, when the political liberals saw this, they went nuts. Waving >> this tome aloft, they cried that Beck was insane, that whoever could >> concoct such as this was obviously diseased. The author should be >> burnt at the stake and the ashes scattered (take no chances). I'm >> serious the "progressives" nearly itched to death! [snip] >It is interesting, but for an entire society to get excited about what is >simply a negotiation stratagem and recognised by anyone who has studied >conflict resolution and negotiation as the "Salami" ploy, is a bit >disappointing. Speaking only from my small bit of This Side of the Pond, Mr Dashwood, I can confess to utter unawareness that such a book was published and saw no evidence that anyone of any study beyond grade-school evidence ought but sadness and boredom. (note to those from other lands - whenever an American (or someone who purports to think like one )makes a statement about an entire group, such as 'all the political liberals' (or feels the need to qualify a labelling of a group with quotation marks, such as "prograssives" (" original)) it is, in my experience, less an attempt at description than it is an attempt at propagandising.) DD
From: Anonymous on 2 Aug 2010 08:13 In article <euednZKJBpriCMjRnZ2dnUVZ_g-dnZ2d(a)earthlink.com>, HeyBub <heybub(a)NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote: [snip] >Just this past week, a congress-critter suggested that the Federal >Communications Commission yank the license of the Fox Network. Cite, please? DD
From: HeyBub on 2 Aug 2010 08:42 docdwarf(a)panix.com wrote: > In article <euednZKJBpriCMjRnZ2dnUVZ_g-dnZ2d(a)earthlink.com>, > HeyBub <heybub(a)NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote: > > [snip] > >> Just this past week, a congress-critter suggested that the Federal >> Communications Commission yank the license of the Fox Network. > > Cite, please? > My bad. It wasn't a Congress-critter; it was Jonathan Zasloff, law professor at UCLA, on the notorious "JournoList" "I hate to open this can of worms," he wrote, "but is there any reason why the FCC couldn't simply pull [Fox's'] broadcasting permit once it expires?"
From: HeyBub on 2 Aug 2010 08:53 docdwarf(a)panix.com wrote: > In article <8bil48FgrnU1(a)mid.individual.net>, > Pete Dashwood <dashwood(a)removethis.enternet.co.nz> wrote: >> HeyBub wrote: > > [snip] > >>> Well, when the political liberals saw this, they went nuts. Waving >>> this tome aloft, they cried that Beck was insane, that whoever could >>> concoct such as this was obviously diseased. The author should be >>> burnt at the stake and the ashes scattered (take no chances). I'm >>> serious the "progressives" nearly itched to death! > > [snip] > >> It is interesting, but for an entire society to get excited about >> what is simply a negotiation stratagem and recognised by anyone who >> has studied conflict resolution and negotiation as the "Salami" >> ploy, is a bit disappointing. > > Speaking only from my small bit of This Side of the Pond, Mr > Dashwood, I can confess to utter unawareness that such a book was > published and saw no evidence that anyone of any study beyond > grade-school evidence ought but sadness and boredom. > > (note to those from other lands - whenever an American (or someone who > purports to think like one )makes a statement about an entire group, > such as 'all the political liberals' (or feels the need to qualify a > labelling of a group with quotation marks, such as "prograssives" (" > original)) it is, in my experience, less an attempt at description > than it is an attempt at propagandising.) > Your experience is sadly flawed. When a smattering of the members of [group] assert something and no other member of [group] objects, one can fairly assume the assertion is universally accepted by all members of [group]. This concept is called "assent by silence" [qui tacet consentire videtur]. I put "progressives" (sorry about offending your sensitive nature with the typographical error) in scare quotes to signify the word does not represent its conventional meaning, but is rather an attempt by members of the liberal persuasion to rehabilitate their image.
From: Anonymous on 2 Aug 2010 08:58
In article <DYWdnX56qp7_IMvRnZ2dnUVZ_s-dnZ2d(a)earthlink.com>, HeyBub <heybub(a)NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote: >docdwarf(a)panix.com wrote: >> In article <euednZKJBpriCMjRnZ2dnUVZ_g-dnZ2d(a)earthlink.com>, >> HeyBub <heybub(a)NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote: >> >> [snip] >> >>> Just this past week, a congress-critter suggested that the Federal >>> Communications Commission yank the license of the Fox Network. >> >> Cite, please? >> > >My bad. It wasn't a Congress-critter; it was Jonathan Zasloff, law professor >at UCLA, on the notorious "JournoList" > >"I hate to open this can of worms," he wrote, "but is there any reason why >the FCC couldn't simply pull [Fox's'] broadcasting permit once it expires?" Curious how a 'congress-critter suggested' turns, when the facts are examined, into a law professor inquiring 'is there any reason'. DD |