Lewn. I admire the capability of Mike to compose or produce
beautiful sentences (I assume he is an writer).
But the issue between us was the opposition between Rockport and Garrard 301 'project'.I.e. not about my
worry about Mike.
So we have the so-called 'initial conditions' or the state
of affairs at present.
Jean made a kind of contribution about(present) 'knowledge
and compability' but sayd nothing about the 'capability'.
Weisselk used the metaphor of the 'Baby and the Bathwater'
to warn about the 'Baby' (aka 'save the Baby).
So the 'picture' one can see or can deduce about the state
of affairs is,at least, very confused.
I used,so to speak, the logical approach and analysed the
statements made. So for me there was the implication that
the 'club' intends,hopes,etc to surpass the engeenirs who
made the Rockport without ,say, the necessary qualifications to realize such an project. I.e. those are
'mechanical matters' that must 'obey' phisical Laws and
are as such not something 'subjective' in the sense of
our 'intending','hoping for'.etc.
So x can hope that y in some garage can produce an better
platter then the engeneers by Rockport but this is,at least, very problematic.
BTW the issue is not about persons but about the arguments.
Cheers
beautiful sentences (I assume he is an writer).
But the issue between us was the opposition between Rockport and Garrard 301 'project'.I.e. not about my
worry about Mike.
So we have the so-called 'initial conditions' or the state
of affairs at present.
Jean made a kind of contribution about(present) 'knowledge
and compability' but sayd nothing about the 'capability'.
Weisselk used the metaphor of the 'Baby and the Bathwater'
to warn about the 'Baby' (aka 'save the Baby).
So the 'picture' one can see or can deduce about the state
of affairs is,at least, very confused.
I used,so to speak, the logical approach and analysed the
statements made. So for me there was the implication that
the 'club' intends,hopes,etc to surpass the engeenirs who
made the Rockport without ,say, the necessary qualifications to realize such an project. I.e. those are
'mechanical matters' that must 'obey' phisical Laws and
are as such not something 'subjective' in the sense of
our 'intending','hoping for'.etc.
So x can hope that y in some garage can produce an better
platter then the engeneers by Rockport but this is,at least, very problematic.
BTW the issue is not about persons but about the arguments.
Cheers