trevelyan

As trevelyan stated, and for clarification: the protocol described in the OP is not PoS.

I'm not sure exactly what 'trevelyan means when he says its not illogical.

In any case, thanks 'trevelyan for pointing me towards some interesting weekend reading!

In the middle of that crisis Trevelyan published his views on the matter.

Stubby Trevelyan smokes, and litters the cigarette butts.

But then I read trevelyan's post above and I feel stupid.

This observatory taught me a life lesson: after finally beating Trevelyan after 100s of attempts I learned I'll never be very good at video games.

Sir Charles Trevelyan used the same argument you do - that there was ample actions Irish landlords could take directly - as an excuse for the government not to take action.

If you or 'trevelyan believe I'm wrong, and that there is or will soon be major media coverage about this story, or that major media coverage doesn't signify anything, you can say that.

This is all really interesting stuff, trevelyan, but I don't see how it buttresses Friedman's argument that the Hong Kong bullet train is a metaphor for the decline of the west, or challenges my argument that the bullet train is a just an anecdote with very little explanatory power.

Trevelyan made completely clear that "the people cannot, under any circumstances, be allowed to starve" in a letter of September 1846.

Trevelyan, who served under both Peel and Russell at the Treasury, and had prime responsibility for famine relief in Ireland, was clear about God's role: "The judgement of God sent the calamity to teach the Irish a lesson, that calamity must not be too much mitigated".

Trevelyan was not a colonial administrator at the time, he was a civil servant in the treasury.

All these features were faithfully incorporated in the Trevelyan-Northcote Report, and thereafter in the system it did so much to create.

The man in charge of the British response to the great hunger was Charles Trevelyan.