Why Not debate "network externality"-path dependence?

[Phillip Hallam-Baker]

You still don't get it. 'Experts' don't get a free ride when they attempt to
influence public policy.

What does the 'status of the debaters' amount to if not an elitist and
antidemcratic ad hominem? What meat does Theroux eat that means that he gets
to decide who is and who is not an expert?

		Phill

> -----Original Message-----
> From: James A. Donald [mailto:jamesd at echeque.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2001 10:53 AM
> To: Phillip Hallam-Baker; 'David Theroux'
> Cc: 'James A. Donald'; 'Declan McCullagh'; 'Paul Spirito'; 'Colin A.
> Reed'; 'Ken Brown'; fight-censorship at vorlon.mit.edu;
> cypherpunks at cyberpass.net; CYBERIA-L at listserv.aol.com; 'Jim Warren';
> 'Jonathan Wallace'; 'Matthew Gaylor'
> Subject: RE: Why Not debate "network externality"-path dependence?
>
>
>      --
> At 09:23 PM 3/4/2001 -0500, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
>  > David,
>  >
>  >	You still don't get it. 'Read my book' is not a valid move in
>  >	a debate. If you were to stand up in front of the Oxford
>  >	Union and say 'my book proves the case entirely' then sat
>  >	down with no further elaboration you lose the debate.
>
> This depends on the relative status of the debaters.  Your
> status as an
> expert is perhaps less than you perceive it to be.
>
>      --digsig
>           James A. Donald
>       6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG
>       7nyEypwoXGtjljpB281LxgekQkbzCtLPiWYid99E
>       4L9TA3M8sE2epY4cVpAqzGwPC9S1AKAsQ7SuF2+nq
>
>