| 1 |
On 29 Mar 2008, at 20:39, Michael Schmarck wrote: |
| 2 |
> Stroller <stroller <at> stellar.eclipse.co.uk> writes: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>> I, too, thought about saying something like this at the time. I'm |
| 5 |
>> glad you have done so and I agree with all your points. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> I don't. I disagree with his most important point... |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
Yes, but you're demonstrating yourself to be a clueless idiot. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
>> Alan's reply was harmless. You're not entitled to pick on him unless |
| 12 |
>> you posted correctly in the first place. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> So, I *am* entitled. Thanks! |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
No, you're not. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
>> You're asking for help - provide as much information as possible and |
| 19 |
>> please don't antagonise people (especially because they may be able |
| 20 |
>> to help you!). |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> Now, please go back and read Alans first post in the thread. It |
| 23 |
> absolutely did not sound, as if he even wanted to help. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
That doesn't matter. Please don't antagonise people, full-stop. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
>> I, too, know what it's like to receive a reply to one of my questions |
| 28 |
>> which I find to be unhelpful and aggravating. However, "two wrongs |
| 29 |
>> don't make a right" and no-one benefits from an angry response. |
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
> Oh, so it's now my fault for responding to a flamebait? Nice. It's |
| 32 |
> not the aggressor who's doing something wrong? |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
It was NOT flamebait. It was HARMLESS. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
Grown up! |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
Stroller. |
| 39 |
-- |
| 40 |
gentoo-user@l.g.o mailing list |
Archives