Re: >H Re: Dynamic Individual Freedom

From: Ian Goddard (igoddard@erols.com)
Date: Fri Aug 30 1996 - 17:22:35 MDT


  At 10:37 AM 8/30/96 +0100, Sarah Marr wrote:

> Absolutely: I think I mentioned elsewhere in my post that I interpret
> 'unlimited' as a 'self-limited', but see it as very open to
> misinterpretation.

IAN: Now I see what you ment. With that stipulation UIF does not run
into the 'running over other's boundaries' problem. Of course then
things get a little more complex than necessary, hence Natasha's
conclusion seems to be the logical default.

> They are good points, but they were made by Peter Voss,
> not Rich Artym.
 
IAN: Wuups -- sorry to steal your thunder Peter.

**********************************************************************
 IAN GODDARD <igoddard@erols.com> FREEDOM: to have it, give it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
 Visit Goddard's Universe --> http://www.erols.com/igoddard/home.htm
______________________________________________________________________



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:35:44 MST