> Every database I listed is not the "Butlerian Jihad," I didn't say what you listed amounted to the "Butlerian Jihad," but you were clearly and deliberately i

> Every database I listed is not the "Butlerian Jihad," I didn't say what you listed amounted to the "Butlerian Jihad," but you were clearly and deliberately implying that I said we should get rid of every database. That's a strawman argument. You need to stop. Ok? > Claiming this is a reason to dislike all databases coupled with your wistful statement "it's not like the old days..." sure looks like your advocating for the old days. Nope. It's possible to dislike things and still compromise with them. > Yes, which is why I mocked your dislike of all such databases Right. You approached the conversation in bad faith. Quite a lot of that going on in this thread. > a weird reference to ancient systems as if they were a better option. A pointed reference to the fact that paper records couldn't be completely compromised remotely. A strength that's very, very pertinent to the discussion of a leak that includes ALL of California gun owners. > But you chose the extremes. This is precisely the strawman to which I was referring. YOU chose the extremes, not me. You've been told by the source (me) that this is not what was being said. Now you need to stop pretending it was. I generally expect a higher level of conversation here than on certain other social media websites. I see that when it comes to political discussion, my expectations are unfounded.