Received: by 10.52.33.199 with SMTP id t7mr5482731vdi.7.1351097737567;
        Wed, 24 Oct 2012 09:55:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-BeenThere: london-hack-space@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.52.26.41 with SMTP id i9ls2371046vdg.2.gmail; Wed, 24 Oct 2012
 09:55:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.52.19.201 with SMTP id h9mr2987338vde.0.1351097732553;
        Wed, 24 Oct 2012 09:55:32 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 09:55:32 -0700 (PDT)
From: Geekinesis <geekine...@googlemail.com>
To: london-hack-space@googlegroups.com
Message-Id: <65c2f4bb-bf84-444b-95f9-1a99833dcf79@googlegroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAP0RkBCCHXa6LMpn8EBBMB=4a14XBS9kNmK1rERqZCiq7pKYeg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <80630926-25AC-4E9A-BC23-2D45207B9A9F@McGaw.eu>
 <67c9f918-2ff0-477a-beac-0513983dca9a@googlegroups.com>
 <CAHv7mDRGsueHB+wacyRE8NmZn+pU3Qwi8KGdT+rpqRjHFdhZjg@mail.gmail.com>
 <1bd1c299-57b3-45a9-9d7e-9d04660231bd@googlegroups.com>
 <CAPgZ-ROySx=+keRUWX-893MLQKwOk71Bzy4DHx+6T+gDWo=MsA@mail.gmail.com>
 <5086CFB0.2060505@googlemail.com>
 <e54f0a48-c4be-4de4-9a28-230fc9ee43d0@googlegroups.com>
 <CAP0RkBCCHXa6LMpn8EBBMB=4a14XBS9kNmK1rERqZCiq7pKYeg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [london-hack-space] Re: Members and non members?
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; 
	boundary="----=_Part_286_17447760.1351097732068"

------=_Part_286_17447760.1351097732068
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; 
	boundary="----=_Part_287_12330925.1351097732069"

------=_Part_287_12330925.1351097732069
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit



On Wednesday, 24 October 2012 09:38:17 UTC+1, David wrote:
>
>
> this just strikes me as almost worthy of politicians. There's a 
> vague possible group of others, people not like us, scroungers who we think 
> must be **taking advantage of us** somehow. thus we must become more closed 
> and hostile to outsiders, increase the cost and challenege people to prove 
> that they're not part of this vague group of scroungers.
>   
>

I didnt say that or suggest that at all, I certainly didnt mention or imply 
"scrounging" (an emotive word at the best of times) or suggest "hostility" 
was  the answer. Please re read my post, I was merely summarising what i 
thought some of the arguments were. (like any good politician)

------=_Part_287_12330925.1351097732069
Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<br><br>On Wednesday, 24 October 2012 09:38:17 UTC+1, David  wrote:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0;margin-left: 0.8ex;border-left: 1px #ccc solid;padding-left: 1ex;"><br><div>this just strikes me as almost&nbsp;worthy of politicians.&nbsp;There's a vague&nbsp;possible group of others, people not like us, scroungers who we think must be **taking advantage of us** somehow. thus we must become more closed and hostile to outsiders, increase the cost and challenege people to prove that they're not part of this vague group of scroungers.<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;<br></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I didnt say that or suggest that at all, I certainly didnt mention or imply "scrounging" (an emotive word at the best of times) or suggest "hostility" was &nbsp;the answer. Please re read my post, I was merely summarising what i thought some of the arguments were. (like any good politician)</div>
------=_Part_287_12330925.1351097732069--

------=_Part_286_17447760.1351097732068--