[blml] Something understood.

[gesta at tiscali.co.uk]

Grattan Endicott<gesta at tiscali.co.uk
[following address discontinued:
grandeval at vejez.fsnet.co.uk]
*****************************
"Between these shoes soles an' this hat,
Stonds a very respectable mon
An' nob'dy'll contradict that 
An' why? Becose nobody con."
      [Samuel Laycock 1692-1763].   
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John (MadDog) Probst" <john at asimere.com>
To: "Bridge Laws Mailing List" <blml at amsterdamned.org>
Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 5:26 PM
Subject: Re: [blml] Something understood.


> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "ton" <t.kooyman at worldonline.nl>
> To: "'Bridge Laws Mailing List'" <blml at amsterdamned.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 5:03 PM
> Subject: Re: [blml] Something understood.
> 
> 
>>
>> <
>> +=+ What must be recognized is that before God we
>> are all equal. It is true that in my initial approach to
>> the 2007 Laws I made a determined effort to persuade
>> colleagues that we should dig up the tree root and branch
>> and devise a wholly new Code of Laws. This could not be
>> achieved because God and my friends decreed that all
>> progress must be incremental rather than revolutionary.
>>
>>
>>
>> I am not sure that Grattan's description above is an 
>> adequate one.
>>
>> Indeed we did not support his effort to produce a 
>> 'wholly mew code of  laws',
>> but the reason?
>> I estimate to have more revolution in my left pink 
>> than Grattan in whatever collection he may compose 
>> (indeed: not including my left pink)
>>
> too much data here ton :)
> 
>>
>> ton
>>
+=+ Now what emotions, I wonder, prompt this 
        conversazione?  Do I detect... oh, surely not. 
       Whatever witness the hard copies in existence 
        bear to the question may always be judged.
                                      ~ G ~   +=+