From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,f03f7958fe713ed1,start
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: language standards
Date: 1997/03/06
Message-ID: <dewar.857664647@merv>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 223618103
Organization: New York University
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-03-06T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Jon said

<<Does this mean that you believe that there should not be any language
standards?  Probably not.  But that is what you are saying, even
thought that is almost certainly not what you mean.>>

Robert said

<<nope, it is not what I am saying (by any stretch of misinterpretation)>>

Jon said

<<Actually, on the face of it - it's precisely what you were saying.>>

Robert replies

nonsense! I guess you can stretch the art of wishful misinterpretation
beyond any boundary I can imagine. Of course I did not say that there
should not be any language standards. You cannot find any statement
to that effect. You think you can prove it using some faulty
syllogism based on your own ideas, i.e. you are saying something like

   Dewar says A
   Jon says A means B
   Therefore Dewar says B

I don't think this logic would win a passing grade on a logic exam :-)