In message <51372538.60604@hovland.cx>, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?J=F8rgen_Hovland?= <jorgen@hovland.cx> wrote:
On 03/06/13 11:48, Brian Nisbet wrote:
Ronald, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote the following on 05/03/2013 20:36:
I'd like to just reiterate my view that all other activities of this WG will be utterly fruitless until such time as a reasonable, rational, and generally accepted definition of "abuse" is in hand.
I genuinely don't think it will be useful to spend time on this. I think an attempt to get a consensual definition of abuse would take the whole of the session in Dublin and every session thereafter and after all that time, I still don't think we would have got anywhere. If the rest of the WG disagrees with me, then we can raise it, but if n = the number of people in the WG, I fear we would have n + 1 definitions.
I am pretty sure it will take until the end of the world to agree on a definition. Perhaps even longer.
"And when the broken hearted people, living in the world agree, there will be an answer, let it be." -- Paul McCartney