: |
please can we remind folk that
(a) posters here don't know who's on the list as a lurker, so don't assume
that anyone being criticised is not reading what is written here, nor
perhaps one of their pupils is a reader here, and is forwarding it to anyone
else
(b) opinions are fine when stated as such but *academic* opinions are
better, otherwise it reduces to an unrecoverable Blur are better than Oasis
kind of debate (perhaps showing my age here)
this is a tiny criticism at this level of comment about Mr KC, but we did
once have to close the list when more severe (and unpleasant,
unsubstantiated) material was posted about a 'name' magician that was
arguably libelous, and that is something we need to avoid
cheers
Dave E
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jake Stratton-Kent" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, March 22, 2010 10:02 AM
Subject: Re: [ACADEMIC-STUDY-MAGIC] Time article dealing with magic at the
state level
> On 22 March 2010 09:00, Jez <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> And separate myself from King Kev.
>
> oh where ignorance is bliss...
>
> I'd managed to get thru' life thus far unaware of this prat's
> existence, google fu before breakfast shd carry a health warning.
>
> Come back Alex, all is forgiven!
>
|