Re: >H Re: Dynamic Individual Freedom

Ian Goddard (
Fri, 30 Aug 1996 19:22:35 -0400

At 10:37 AM 8/30/96 +0100, Sarah Marr wrote:

> Absolutely: I think I mentioned elsewhere in my post that I interpret
> 'unlimited' as a 'self-limited', but see it as very open to
> misinterpretation.

IAN: Now I see what you ment. With that stipulation UIF does not run
into the 'running over other's boundaries' problem. Of course then
things get a little more complex than necessary, hence Natasha's
conclusion seems to be the logical default.

> They are good points, but they were made by Peter Voss,
> not Rich Artym.

IAN: Wuups -- sorry to steal your thunder Peter.

IAN GODDARD <> FREEDOM: to have it, give it.
Visit Goddard's Universe -->