Chambers wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Mueen Nawaz [mailto:m.n### [at] ieeeorg]
>> 	If you want to invoke this, you have to provide a sense of all
>> those
>> people who did likewise and had a negative effect on society, which I
>> suspect occurred much more frequently than the people you speak of.
> 
> I'd be interested in knowing, who do you think had a significant
> negative effect on society by not being censored?

	It was hard for me to understand the relevance of your question to my
point - but I think I have it.

	Suffice it to say that not finding individuals who had a significant
negative effect on society says little. If you have, say, 1000 people
who had (relatively) small negative effects for each person who had one
large effect, it adds up.

	My point was that you're looking only at those individuals who had a
great impact. Look also at the numerous individuals who had
significantly less impact (as well as those who had a great one) - if
they are large in number, they may outweigh the positives.

	Also, it's hard to give examples because most societies have
censorship. What you're saying essentially is, "Remove censorship, and
there won't be many bad people whose net impact is significantly
negative. Trust me."

	And I'm saying, "I won't trust you - give me better data. Arguments
don't count as data."

	Which is different from me saying "I think you're wrong".

-- 
If electricity comes from electrons, does morality come from morons?


                    /\  /\               /\  /
                   /  \/  \ u e e n     /  \/  a w a z
                       >>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
                                   anl

Post a reply to this message