<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#ffffff">
On 07/08/2010 23:51, Cybe R. Wizard wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:20100807085112.6af5ab43@WizardsTower" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On Sat, 07 Aug 2010 19:27:54 +1000
Basil Chupin <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:blchupin@iinet.net.au"><blchupin@iinet.net.au></a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Thanks for listening.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
Seconded. Less ambiguity is always a good thing.
Thanks again, Alan.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<b>NO</b> ambiguity is the ideal situation - not LESS ambiguity <span
class="moz-smiley-s1"><span> :-) </span></span>.<br>
<br>
However, 'no ambiguity' cannot ever be achieved (otherwise there would
never ever be the need for lawyers or judges or the whole judicial
bureaucratic behemoth, which would never, ever, be a desirable outcome
now, would it? <span class="moz-smiley-s2"><span> :-( </span></span>)
and so what you suggest, namely "less ambiguity" is the more pragmatic
solution.<br>
<br>
BC<br>
<br>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
If apathy is increasing where does it come from?
</pre>
</body>
</html>