Invoking Godwin's Law

Nethaniel St. Donovan nethaniel at box201.com
Wed Apr 20 01:24:31 UTC 2005



> -----Original Message-----
> From: fedora-test-list-bounces at redhat.com [mailto:fedora-test-list-
> bounces at redhat.com] On Behalf Of Raymond Lillard
> Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2005 7:12 PM
> To: For testers of Fedora Core development releases
> Subject: Re: Invoking Godwin's Law
> 
> Alexander Dalloz wrote:
> > Am Mi, den 20.04.2005 schrieb Raymond Lillard um 2:28:
> >
> >
> >>Alexander,
> >>
> >>Please see:
> >>	http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law
> >>
> >>Ray
> >
> >
> > Ray,
> >
> > thank you. Meanwhile Paul contacted me personally and cleared things up
> > for me. "Godwin's Law" didn't mean anything for me up to that point
> > (though I am a usenet user since '96 or so). One needs some inverse
> > logic for bringing it together with the not ending "lilo is gone"
> > discussion, where no arguments are given any longer ... but I think I
> > made it :)
> 
> You're welcome.  Sadly Paul's posting is subject to Quirk's
> Exception, which means we are probably doomed to more of
> this foolishness.
> 
> Quirk's Exception:
>      Intentional invocation of this so-called "Nazi Clause"
>      is ineffectual.
> 
> I've killed threads on this topic at least a half dozen times
> but it keeps coming back.
> 
> Regards,
> Ray
> 
> --
> fedora-test-list mailing list
> fedora-test-list at redhat.com
> To unsubscribe:
> http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list

So this would imply Paul has "lost" the rant and also in poor form?

PARAPHRASED from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law:
" In addition, whoever points out that Godwin's law applies to the thread is
also considered to have "lost" the battle, as it is considered poor form to
invoke the law explicitly. "





More information about the fedora-test-list mailing list