[EM] The meaning of this discussion (or lack thereof)

[Michael Allan]

matt welland wrote:
> Ah, yes I can see the error. Some poor and ambiguous English on my
> part.  I intended to group the "irrelevant and pointless" and apply
> it to the word "discuss". Sorry about that.

I guess I understood that, no need to apologize.

> > > > > The meaning of an individual vote is mostly irrelevant and
> > > > > pointless to discuss. ...

I still think you are wrong, and I put a question to you fair and
square:  Is it your intention to imply that the individual vote is
irrelevant?  Is that what you think, or not?

-- 
Michael Allan

Toronto, +1 416-699-9528
http://zelea.com/


matt welland wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-08-29 at 04:28 -0400, Michael Allan wrote:
> > matt welland wrote:
> > > I did not say that a "vote has little meaning", I said that it is
> > > meaningless to discuss the individual vote! Those are two vastly
> > > different things.
> > 
> > Well, I think what you said is wrong.  Here is the original version:
> > 
> > > > > The meaning of an individual vote is mostly irrelevant and
> > > > > pointless to discuss. ...
> > 
> > This implies that the individual vote itself is irrelevant.  I wish to
> > clarify your intention on that point: are you saying that the
> > individual vote is irrelevant
> 
> Ah, yes I can see the error. Some poor and ambiguous English on my
> part.  I intended to group the "irrelevant and pointless" and apply
> it to the word "discuss". Sorry about that.