Jay rites:
>Especially noteworthy were references to
>articles in the London Times from the 1840s that claimed that by discussing
>the relative strength of door and safe locks, the Times was contributing to
>criminal knowledge, and that some subjects were too sensitive to allow
>public discussion.
Well IMNSHO, one sign of a lack of knowlege is a refusal to participate in
intelligent discussion. At the same time, I reserve the right to demand
some proof of intelligence (or at least politeness) before going into
complex discussion.
I have been assailed too often by people demanding not information but
to be spoon-feed tools of destruction and who become abusive when
I refuse to pander to their whims. There is a difference between teaching
(which requires only a log and a willing student) and someone who demands
gifts as their "right".
Warmly,
Padgett
|
|
