Re: ??

Maybe this  sort of contributions is the main reason for such low traffic
here ...

 

Peter

 

von Roger Pewick



For two decades we have been told that there is nothing worth correcting in
TFLB from which is concluded that the only thing now worth discussing are
ambiguities.  And now it is pointed out that low traffic is a consequence of
no ambiguities.  My assessment is different: low traffic is actually a
consequence of too many ambiguities.so many that it is too overwhelming.
Overwhelming?  How so?  Well, since there is no hope that discussing
ambiguities will get them repaired the obvious answer is that thinking
people have better things to do.

 

Take 44C for example.  This law must be the most clear and concise in the
book.  Not so.  Presumably you believe what it says hook, line, and
sinker....  And I will point you to 63B and ask why it is there since 44C is
so important?  And for those that can't let go, the big question makes me
wonder why 64B exists.  But since 64B is there- I wonder why a COOT is
penalized but the failure to perform the most important obligation is not.
And since 64B conveys that it is justice to not penalize the failure to
perform the most important obligation: there is merely the smallest utility
from the presence of 64C- after all, since justice has already been done via
64B, there is no more justice to be had, is there?

_______________________________________________
Blml mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml