Re: [LEAPSECS] building consensus

From: John Cowan <cowan_at_CCIL.ORG>
Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 13:14:37 -0400

M. Warner Losh scripsit:

> In message: <>
> Rob Seaman <seaman_at_NOAO.EDU> writes:
> : Actually, this list is not a "discussion" per se. If we simplify the
> : positions - just for the sake of argument here - to "leap second yes"
> : and "leap second no", the reality is that the folks pushing the "leap
> : second no" position have never engaged with this list. There are
> : several doughty people here who happen to have that opinion, but they
> : abide with us mortals outside the time lords' hushed inner sanctum.
> What an amaizingly unhelpful and offsensive statement. I have spent
> much time explaining why leap seconds cause real problems in real
> applications, only to be insulted like this.

I believe you have misread Rob's remark, though I concede that it was
easy to misread. I believe Rob meant that the people who are pushing
"leap seconds no" in *official* channels are not to be found on this list.
That being so, the "leap seconds yes" folks are unable to challenge them
or persuade them otherwise.

You and I, on the other hand, fall into the "doughty people here" group.

Is a chair finely made tragic or comic? Is the          John Cowan
portrait of Mona Lisa good if I desire to see 
it? Is the bust of Sir Philip Crampton lyrical,
epical or dramatic?  If a man hacking in fury
at a block of wood make there an image of a cow,
is that image a work of art? If not, why not?               --Stephen Dedalus
Received on Thu Jun 01 2006 - 10:14:56 PDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sat Sep 04 2010 - 09:44:55 PDT