"George Patterson" wrote in message
news:vhhXe.5275$T55.4460@trndny06...
Doug Carter wrote:
On 2005-09-17, RST Engineering wrote:

Jay, goddammit, you don't have ONE defender in this ng for your actions.

Probably has a lot more than ONE.

Perhaps, but let's see what they're agreeing with.

Jay started out by stating that sticking a wing into a puffy cloud
(apparently
cumulus) the size of a semi while flying VFR at an altitude reserved for
IFR
traffic is not a violation of the FARs. Anyone agree with that?

That he might have been climbing or descending and stuck a wing into widely
spaced clouds the size of a semi that could not hide IFR traffic......yes.

Jay then stated that, since clouds aren't defined, he can make up his own
definition. Anyone agree with that?

Yes....we can all make up our own definitions.

When presented with a dictionary definition, Jay argued that, since it
wasn't
precise enough to suit him, he should be allowed to make up his own
definition.
Anyone agree with that?

Sure, he can make his own definition any time he wants as can all of us.
Could be his definition is better that any other previously published and
might become the legal standard. Definitions are in constant flux.
Dictionaries aren't legal documents far as I know. Definitions vary widely
depending on the dictionary referenced.

George Patterson
Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to
use the Internet and he won't bother you for weeks.