Re: In Defense of Book Burning (was Re: Sharon chickens out (was Re: PING: Ben [was Re: The Failure of Feminism]



On Sun, 18 Jun 2006 16:13:43 -0400, PolishKnight <marek1@xxxxxxx>
wrote in <marek1-D2B5D9.16134318062006@news>:

In article <khsa92dc7mhau124vrh4set6d02gcf378h@xxxxxxx>,
Sharon B <sharon@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Sun, 18 Jun 2006 11:13:39 -0400, PolishKnight <marek1@xxxxxxx>
wrote in <marek1-260828.11133918062006@news>:

In article <djia92psqbn4kg6ojrkumi4vilhpadqbbu@xxxxxxx>,
Sharon B <sharon@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 21:55:38 -0400, PolishKnight <marek1@xxxxxxx>
wrote in <marek1-012621.21553812062006@news>:

[...]
The policy is quite simply that if a book is destroyed,
the library patron has to compensate them for the loss.
There is no special case made for burning the book
or otherwise deliberately destroying it.

Likewise, there is no special case made in the library policy to
address breaking down the doors to get a book in the middle of the
night--and for the same reason, you utter dumbazz.

Perhaps because there isn't such a policy, "dumbazz."

Nope, that's the wrong answer Soboloonski!

You lose. Try to accept it gracefully, ok?

Fortunately for me, I live in the real world where soc.fr00t logic
does not apply.

I've offered you the opportunity to get a laugh out
of me getting busted for just $500. You apparently
don't have a lot of faith in your "real world".

Crime doesn't pay.

No, soboloonski: I'm not ponying up your bail money or conspiring
with you to commit felonies.

.