Subj : when a practice does it better.
To   : Dan Clough
From : Michiel van der Vlist
Date : Tue Feb 25 2025 09:12 am

Hello Dan,

On Monday February 24 2025 08:12, you wrote to me:

MK>> Nevermind "better", totally ignoring everything FTS-5003 has to
MK>> say about anything it supposedly covers is the "best" idea.

MvV>> If totally ignoring the FTSC is te "best" idea, why bother to
MvV>> have an FTSC at all?

DC> Since you're very "detail-oriented", I thought I'd point out that he
DC> didn't say the FTSC should be ignored.  He said FTS-5003 should be
DC> ignored.  Pretty big difference there, no?

It is indeed not the same. I jumped two steps ahead. So let me help you by filling in the missing steps:

1) If totally ignoring FTS-5003 is the "best" idea, what is stopping us from totally ignoring any other FTSC standard that one does not agree with?

2) If totally ignoring any FTSC standard that one does not agree with is the "best", what stops us from totally ignoring anything that the FTSC does or produces?

3) if nothing stops us from totally ignoring the FTSC why bother to have an FTSC at all?

Hope this helps.


Cheers, Michiel

--- GoldED+/W32-MSVC 1.1.5-b20130111
* Origin: Klein Schnøørd (2:280/5555.1)

You are viewing proxied material from cvs.synchro.net. The copyright of proxied material belongs to its original authors. Any comments or complaints in relation to proxied material should be directed to the original authors of the content concerned. Please see the disclaimer for more details.