Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!lavaca.uh.edu!menudo.uh.edu!sugar!ficc!peter From: peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk Subject: Re: Anarchy (Re: Fool) Message-ID: Date: 13 Nov 90 21:21:26 GMT References: <18667@rpp386.cactus.org> <1990Nov2.191240.4568@lavaca.uh.edu> <1990Nov12.033234.9412@com50.c2s.mn.org> Organization: Xenix Support, FICC Lines: 18 I said: > >Anarchy does *not* mean "no rules". Anarchy means "no ruler". In article <1990Nov12.033234.9412@com50.c2s.mn.org>, craig@com50.c2s.mn.org (Craig Wilson) writes: > My dictionary seems to provide for the lack of rules as being a basis for > anarchy. A dictionary is not an authoritative source in matters like this. In fact the usual result of this sort of response is what is commonly known as a "dictionary war". I shall refrain, and I hope that everyone else does so too. > the moderator of n.a.n seems to be approaching the dictatorial stage according > to some people on the net. He thinks he has a certain power. Is this meant to imply that if I think I'm god you shall bow down and worship me? If so, let me know right now so I can start exacting a tithe... -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' +1 713 274 5180. 'U` peter@ferranti.com