Re: self-explanations and self-alerts

In article <ik6o04554l8o6d1fd1brd8r4gv8vu20bd4@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
dranon  <dranon@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
....
>You are just wrong, Bob.  But you are not alone.  Many in the online
>community (at least at BBO) share your misguided understanding.
>However, if you were to bother to actually read the site rules, you
>might find that you are wrong and stop making silly in public.

You are talking at cross purposes.  It is not clear exactly what Bob _is_
talking about, but he is _not_ talking about the same thing that you are
talking about.  Where I work (software dev), we have a long-standing
policy that nobody is ever wrong.  This is achieved by never having two
people be talking about exactly the same thing.

Such is the case here.  I think Bob is talking about "How it is on the
street", while the rest are talking about theoretically correct.  Note
that I personally agree 100% with most of the posters here - my practice
is that the extent of any agreements that I have is an implicit "SAYC as
you see it, do your best" - i.e., absolutely nothing explicit.  So, I
can, in all honesty, respond to all queries with "no agreement".

However, Bob's point is that that is not how it is on the street, and if
you are not strong-willed enough to insist on it, you could easily be
convinced otherwise.