Re:Researchers say FAA is overblowing risk posed by small dr...
by vacri on Wednesday March 16, 2016 @01:02AM
(#11295153)
> Was the black cat interfering with things?
If you require intent for something to be considered interference, I guess you're not much of a wave physicist.
> I never accused anyone of acting maliciously.
No, my point was that that was what you were saying the papers were doing - you were saying that the papers were injecting malicious intent into the story. Okay, you didn't literally use the word 'malicious', but I think most people would not have a problem with it, given the context you were suggesting the papers were giving ("active interference" preventing firefighters from doing their work)
If you require intent for something to be considered interference, I guess you're not much of a wave physicist.
> I never accused anyone of acting maliciously.
No, my point was that that was what you were saying the papers were doing - you were saying that the papers were injecting malicious intent into the story. Okay, you didn't literally use the word 'malicious', but I think most people would not have a problem with it, given the context you were suggesting the papers were giving ("active interference" preventing firefighters from doing their work)