[Tichy]

Do you own a building? Or may I perhaps defecate your web site, for the sake of art?

[James_Duval]

You'd have to eat it first, and servers can be crunchy.

[Tichy]

Well, it would be for the sake of art. You'd be surprised by the kind of things people do for art.

[arrrg]

What are you talking about?

I’m talking about definitions and the argument about definitions that’s happening here. Arguing about definitions is foolish, it’s point- and meaningless. Who cares what vandalism is? The important thing is how one views a certain act, not how one defines vandalism. That only clouds the issue.

Also, I find people who think there are absolutes when it comes to this issue extremely funny.

[cjg]

I don't think arguing about definitions is pointless, although it often turns out that way.

Take, for example, the classic "if a tree falls in a forest and no-one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?". Resolving this question comes down to seeing that it depends on how sound is defined: pressure waves in the air or a neural state change related to those waves hitting an ear.

Once we see that a words (like "sound") has several definitions it allows us to see the world more clearly. Perhaps we invent new words for the sub-concepts that are generated.

[Tichy]

presumably if you want to make a law about it, you have to define it somehow. What solution do you propose?

[rejoinder]

One hopes you'll use the bit bucket.