So, basically, you want to re-fight the old flamewar. Gotcha.
> What's good for the goose....
I'm glad you've proven you didn't read or understand any of the old
flames. I'm sad that you want to repeat them.
> The rules do not explicitly say you can use bugs,
Thank you. That is my point. I'm glad you agree with it. Why you had
to write 100 more lines about it, I don't know.
> If I submit a bug report to the moderator and he
> tells me it's a bug and not to use it, I won't. But if I send in a report
> and get no reply, I must assume it's a feature and use it.
You can, but you don't _have_ to.
> It has been established several times in the past discussions of this topic
> that using bugs is not cheating. Period. End of story.
Funny, I just said that. But you had to write in to disagree with me.
I suspect that you're disagreeing with my claim that it is not
necessarily ethical to use bugs. I, personally, think that it is not
ethical to do so. Someone will probably now write a 100-page flame
about my past behavior. I think my past behavior was unethical. So
flaming me about it is a waste of everyone's time, but I'm sure it
will happen anyway, just as the letter I'm replying to flamed me about
it.
> Why do we insist on covering the same ground
> again and again and again?!?
Why do _you_ insist on covering the same ground?
-- g