10-18-2008, 12:43 PM
> one would have to agree with
> your premise that anyone besides Jobs has any right to Jobs'
> medical information to participate here.
I wrote that it was "patently false" because it's self-contradicting. you're both disagreeing and participating.
Unreasoned for the aforementioned reason.
Your responses are usually better thought out than that.
...
> Is it not inconceivable that Jobs is already orchestrating his departure?
It is possible that Jobs is getting ready to leave. I submit that his (and the board's) failing to name a successor and provide a timeline is highly irresponsible and more evidence tht he should step down.
> your premise that anyone besides Jobs has any right to Jobs'
> medical information to participate here.
I wrote that it was "patently false" because it's self-contradicting. you're both disagreeing and participating.
Unreasoned for the aforementioned reason.
Your responses are usually better thought out than that.
...
> Is it not inconceivable that Jobs is already orchestrating his departure?
It is possible that Jobs is getting ready to leave. I submit that his (and the board's) failing to name a successor and provide a timeline is highly irresponsible and more evidence tht he should step down.