Re: since we are on legal matters ...

The Cunctator wrote in part:

>Alex R. (Alex756) wrote:

>>Wikipedia automatically attributes original works. I can't imagine it being otherwise
>>because then no one could make GFDL compliant derivative works. How would
>>one determine who the five major contributors were?

>I can imagine it otherwise. Your inability to imagine it so does not make it
>so.

Now, at this point, it would be /helpful/ to explain how you imagine it so.
Even if the text that you write further down is such an explanation
(as in this case I believe that it is), it would be helpful to note that,
to say something like "I explain below how this can be imagined.".

Certainly, you've made your rhetorical point just fine:
Alex argued against your position by saying that he couldn't imagine it,
and you correctly noted that his failure of imagination
is not any sort of argument against your position.  Very well.

But if your goal is not just to score points, but to /change minds/,
then it would be useful to be helpful in your correspondence.
This is a practical matter, since in my past experience,
people have often interpreted your comments are mere curmudgeonliness.

Just friendly advice!


-- Toby