Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> On Mon, 03 May 2010 13:43:47 -0400, Warp wrote:

> > Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> >> On Sun, 02 May 2010 02:46:04 -0400, Warp wrote:
> > 
> >> > Stephen <mca### [at] aoldotcom> wrote:
> >> >> Good guess and said better than I could but I just don't want anyone
> >> >> to live in a Nazi state.
> >> > 
> >> >   I think this is a genuine instance of Godwin's law.
> > 
> >> I think it's actually a genuine instance of *not* Godwinning a thread
> >> by invoking the Nazis - it's a perfect example.
> > 
> >   No. Godwin's law says: "As an online discussion grows longer, the
> > probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1."
> > 
> >   It's precisely a comparison which was not made to invoke the law, but
> > came as a result of the discussion. In fact, I think there's someone
> > else's corollary that says that a deliberate invocation of Godwin's law
> > isn't.

> Except that in Nazi Germany, this sort of thing is pretty much precisely 
> what was done - racial profiling to identify those of Jewish (or other 
> 'undesirable') descent.

> It's actually relevant to this discussion, not like other instances where 
> a thread is Godwinned by a comparison that really is not realistic at all.

  Well, that's more or less what I said above. A deliberate invocation of
Godwin's law isn't.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message