From: Bruce Lilly (blilly@erols.com)
Date: Sat May 01 2004 - 14:00:35 CDT
Charles Lindsey wrote:
> In <200404291400.i3TDxx5U012243@jefferson.patriot.net> "Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz" <Shmuel+gen@patriot.net> writes:
>>There is no "implied SHOULD NOT" in RFC2119. Either it's there or it
>>isn't.
>
>
> It is a matter of simple logic. "SHOULD DO X" implies "SHOULD NOT DO NOT
> X".
Your "logic" is flawed. You seem to have persistent trouble with the
"fallacy of the excluded middle". Please study
http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/skepticism/blfaq_fall_falsedilemma.htm
or any other relevant discussion (google for "fallacy excluded middle").