RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: LOV and LTV

["Davies, Daniel" <daniel.davies@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Justin wrote:

>I have argued this point ins ome detail in my What's Wrong with
>Exploitation? Nous 1995,

At this point I must once more apologise for having taken a somewhat snippy
tone in this thread; it is entirely because I am an idiot.  I seem to have
acquired the belief that "What's Wrong with Exploitation?" and "In Defense
of Exploitation" were the same paper and that this paper was called "In
Defence [note spelling] of Exploitation".  As a result I've been searching
fruitlessly for this non-paper for the last three days and was beginning to
uncharitably suspect that it didn't exist.  A thousand apologies.  In the
circumstances, I agree that we'd better stop; I may come back on this once
I've read the papers if I still disagree.  Alternatively, if I find that I
agree with you, I promise to start a cult in your name and argue with
anybody who I decide is misinterpreting you :-)

dd


___________________________________________________
Email Disclaimer

This communication is for the attention of the
named recipient only and should not be passed
on to any other person. Information relating to
any company or security, is for information
purposes only and should not be interpreted as
a solicitation or offer to buy or sell any security.
The information on which this communication is based
has been obtained from sources we believe to be reliable,
but we do not guarantee its accuracy or completeness.
All expressions of opinion are subject to change
without notice.  All e-mail messages, and associated attachments,
are subject to interception and monitoring for lawful business purposes.
___________________________________________________