10-18-2008, 12:58 PM
MacMagus wrote:
> 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.
...
Er, OK, sorry- here's what I meant:
> one would have to agree with your premise that anyone besides Jobs has any right to Jobs' medical information to participate in a discussion of whether he has some sort of moral/ethical/legal obligation to step down.