On Sun, 17 Apr 2016 20:56:06 +0100,
bert wrote:
But if they banned everyone which was "probably" or "possibly" harmful
there may not be many left.
It would help, if people positively acknowledged and acted according to
the verdicts already pronounced, and the evidence already produced.

This clinging to the uncertain, this emphasizing on the supposed
contradictions does not advance anything and can only serve to keep
people from changing their habits.

If you are into keeping up your current practice by all means and into
denying anything which might become momentarily inconvenient, you are
free to do as you please, if you find a way that does not impose
inconvenience to everybody else.

Michael
--
Location: Lower Normandy (Orne), France
GnuPG brainpoolP512r1/5C2A258D 2015-10-02 [expires: 2017-10-01]
sub brainpoolP512r1/53461AFA 2015-10-02 [expires: 2017-10-01]