185
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 88:
Line 88: + + + +
Another point
:::::: You removed more than I meant (although of course I was agreeing to ''your'' proposal, so I guess that you removed what ''you'' meant!). I had no problem with the bit that I've reinstated; the footnote was an ''example'' of that, not a reference for that, so in effect the statement was unreferenced anyway, and it remains so, but I doubt that anyone really disputes it. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 00:25, 4 March 2008 (EST)
:::::: You removed more than I meant (although of course I was agreeing to ''your'' proposal, so I guess that you removed what ''you'' meant!). I had no problem with the bit that I've reinstated; the footnote was an ''example'' of that, not a reference for that, so in effect the statement was unreferenced anyway, and it remains so, but I doubt that anyone really disputes it. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 00:25, 4 March 2008 (EST)
:::::::Thanks! Oops. Yeah, I erred on the side of pulling too much out... okay now I'm actually going to bed. In the morning/after work I'll have to work more on the securities category.[[User:PhoenixWright|PhoenixWright]] 00:27, 4 March 2008 (EST)
:::::::Thanks! Oops. Yeah, I erred on the side of pulling too much out... okay now I'm actually going to bed. In the morning/after work I'll have to work more on the securities category.[[User:PhoenixWright|PhoenixWright]] 00:27, 4 March 2008 (EST)
== Another point ==
I'm not trying to imply that quote mining is done by creationists. I'm merely trying to clarify the term. I just want to make sure you know that this isn't a political issue for me; it's simply unethical use of authority. No matter who does it, it's wrong (and I haven't read the books TOA cites, so I don't know if creationists do it). Further, I was a recent quote mining victim. Representing a client, our opponent's appellate brief used an ellipsis to hide a "not." So it went something like "it is settled law that party Y can... do activity Z." The real quote from the case was "it is settled law that party Y can '''''not''''' do activity Z." I was stunned.-[[User:PhoenixWright|PhoenixWright]] 00:34, 4 March 2008 (EST)