You've
misinterpreted my meaning. I was responding to a poster who
suggested that the intent underlying the development of a
product was relevant to the appropriateness of its use. That I disagree
with this position does not mean, as you have assumed, that
I automatically adopt the other extreme -- that because there is an
inappropriate use for a product, it cannot be used at all. Your
attempt at a false dichotomy is rather transparent.
I would HOPE it was transparent... it was meant as a tongue in cheek
response. I didn't honestly think you believed in the extreme logical end
to the concept.
Sorry, I thought it would be understood as a goof when I asked for your
car. :-)
-chris
<http://www.mythtech.net>
You never know on this list, as there tends to be an abundance of reductio ad absurdum
posts that are not at all tongue in cheek!
You wouldn't want my car anyway, it's a lease.
-W