XPost: rec.photo.digital 
 From: alan.browne@FreeLunchVideotron.ca 
  
 Jeremy Nixon wrote: 
 >   wrote: 
 > 
 > 
 >>The challenge made to critics of the current proposal has been "You 
 >>think of a better name that matches these rules.  If you can't, the 
 >>name stays."  But the problem is that the rules are so complicated 
 >>that there is no simple name that can describe them.  If you make the 
 >>rules simple an appropriate name can also be simple. 
 > 
 > 
 > Does it make sense to draft the rules around the availability of a simple 
 > name?  Wouldn't it be better to draft the rules around the viability of 
 > discussion?  Especially given that the rules cannot be enforced anyway, 
 > they're much more likely to be observed if they actually make sense, 
 > rather than being based on an arbitrary technical division no one really 
 > cares all that much about. 
  
 Where do I send the flowers? 
  
  
 -- 
 -- rec.photo.equipment.35mm user resource: 
 -- http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm 
 -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.-- 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)