Rui Miguel Silva Seabra rms@1407.org
On Thu, 2006-02-23 at 22:12 +0000, MJ Ray wrote:
Can you prove he hasn't read it? Then don't claim it so quickly.
Let's see... he makes direct claims over content of the GFDL of things that not only are _not_ there, but also explicitly can't be according to the text.
In the part of the message you removed, I explained why I think certain common dedications (such as to people involved in your historical connection with the subject) are explicitly allowed in invariant sections. Therefore, it's not proven any more than a claim that *you* haven't read the FDL. If one cares about formal proof enough to use QED, please explain the steps.
Also, I feel accusing someone of reading while on crack cocaine is a personal attack, even if it was (lame IMO) humour. Would you enjoy that accusation being made of you? Please consider apologising.
In hope,