> No, I would argue that Mr. St. Hilaire is taking a position which while
> quite possibly incorrect is relevant to the thread.  And it certainly
> seems that your objection to his voicing his position is based on the
> content of that position.  Am I misunderstanding?

At least insofar as my posts are concerned, yes.

>
> On Fri, 5 Apr 2002, Richard Rauch wrote:
>
> >> >Stephane: This isn't an appropriate forum for being an MS apologist.  I
> >>
> >> I don't want to extend this (already pointlessly repetitive thread), but
> >> I _do_ think we shouldn't be in the business of telling people that
> >> certain _positions_ as opposed to certain _topics_ are not appropriate
> >> for our mailing lists.
> >
> >(shrug) Being an apologist is just drawing fire and spamming the list.
> >If you want to split that hair, though, I certainly agree: The _topic_ of
> >MS is out of band.  Whether you are for or against MS.
> >
> >I do not think that I actually took a stance on MS in the message that you
> >replied to.  I certainly have an *opinion* on MS, but that's beside the
> >matter.
> >
> >
> >> I know of no statement from core barring certain beliefs from these
> >> lists.  Someone making an argument may be wrong (and I think in this
> >
> >I know of no statement that I made suggesting that *beliefs* were barred.
> >
> >
> >  ``I probably don't know what I'm talking about.'' --rauch@math.rice.edu
> >
>
> - --
> 				Jim Wise
> 				jwise@draga.com
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (NetBSD)
> Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
>
> iD8DBQE8rc1JN71lEcOYcw4RApa2AKCSa937do7spNuAVbGT78+ii3mbpwCcCMHO
> 2zsF3BE54Mx/zUVR9w7N2s4=
> =DbRI
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>

  ``I probably don't know what I'm talking about.'' --rauch@math.rice.edu