Subject: Re: source access vs dynamism
From: Erik Naggum <>
Date: 1999/09/14
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Message-ID: <>

* Raffael Cavallaro
| So you see Erik, you explicitly deny that people submit to unacceptable
| conditions because they would become destitute (or worse) otherwise.  You
| blame them for their own opression.

  can you stick to Lisp in comp.lang.lisp, Raffael Cavallaro?

  you been unable to see any point but your own in this discussion, and it
  has proved to be entirely useless to try to make you see others, but let
  me say that your inference from what I say is yours only.  the "blame"
  part is your invention and has nothing to do with what I say or mean.  I
  have _questioned_ why people accept these conditions, I have not _blamed_
  them for it.  when I say that "becoming destitute" is not the answer,
  it's because accepting unacceptable working conditions isn't the only
  option people have, even in your third world contries.  but, a question
  is just as good as blaming them in your mind, and it will never be any
  different, because you're nuts and fail to understand that some issues
  need to be opened because the answers people think they have today are
  wrong.  the proof that they are wrong is that people react with extreme
  emotion against re-opening the question: whatever they think they know is
  under severe threat merely by asking.  this means that there are other
  answers that are not politically acceptable to some people to even seek.

  so, can you stick to Lisp in comp.lang.lisp, Raffael Cavallaro?

  it's election time in Norway.  explains everything, doesn't it?