Re: On view updating
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 18:04:58 -0700
Message-ID: <2rjui5F19ul9nU1_at_uni-berlin.de>
>>You admitted you have no formal semantics, that is no mathematic and >>tons of handwaving, so discussion is closed.I should have known better.
>
>
> It is always a waste of time to discuss with you. You never want to
> reason and you think that only what you know exists.
>
There's a very serious difference between "reason" and "propaganda".
Just because you submit yourself to be a propaganda tool for whatever D&D, that does not give you any legitimacy.
> Views are variables by definition and by prescription, it can't be
> discussed. What is bullshit is your irrelevant pap about semantics.
Oh, what a non-sense. If they are your (by authorship or choice) definition and prescription, they are deeply flawed.
The reason why it's bullshit is because it contradicts all the theory and practice of modern language design, on one hand, and even inspite of that it would still have a chance of being legitimate, provided that somebody could point the math behind such a proposal. You refuse to to produce it. Case closed.
Got MATH ? Received on Sat Sep 25 2004 - 03:04:58 CEST