| 1 |
On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 18:39:09 +0000 (UTC), Michael Schmarck wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> > You have a problem to which you do not know the solution, so how are |
| 4 |
> > you supposed to know what is important and what is not? |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> As it seems, I knew what was not important. Just have a look at the |
| 7 |
> real root cause of the problem. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
Isn't hindsight wonderful? You now know what is relevant to the solution |
| 10 |
of a problem you did not understand at the time. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
> > Of course, none of this really matters as people will be hesitant to |
| 13 |
> > offer any advice in future, no matter how complete your post, because |
| 14 |
> > you have demonstrated a complete lack of civility and respect for |
| 15 |
> > those that you expect to help you. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> Oh, that's wrong. Alan very much demonstrated that he did not want to |
| 18 |
> help. Why else would he have posted his snide comment? And if you look |
| 19 |
> carefully, you'll see that I even treated him respectfully, when he |
| 20 |
> tried to be helpful. Care to point out where I showed a "complete lack |
| 21 |
> of civilty"? And care to point out the civilty in what Alan posted in |
| 22 |
> his (maybe unintended) flamebait? |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
This has nothing to do with Alan, (who, incidentally, has demonstrated |
| 25 |
his knowledge and willingness to help many times over) ad everything to |
| 26 |
do with your attitude. So you found his post unhelpful, well get over it. |
| 27 |
Either ignore the post or respond by expressing your views without insult. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
You have done yourself no favours. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
Neil Bothwick |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
RISC: Reduced Into Silly Code |
Archives