| 1 |
On 22 Dec 2008, at 23:18, Stroller wrote: |
| 2 |
> ... |
| 3 |
>> I am currently searching my subscription info, the gentoo site, or |
| 4 |
>> the |
| 5 |
>> mailing list welcome for any hints that html messages are rude or |
| 6 |
>> unwanted. I am having some difficulty finding it, that alone is a |
| 7 |
>> warning sign that the amount of pre-specialization needed to |
| 8 |
>> participate in the community is dangerously prohibitive to the point |
| 9 |
>> where it is almost invisible. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> Oh, $deity. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> I don't even want to start on this one. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> <sigh/> |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> This is just such a sophisticated & well-constructed sentence, |
| 18 |
> contrived to present your innocence in any wrongdoing which may |
| 19 |
> possibly have happened to have occurred. The implication of this is |
| 20 |
> that anyone who sees things differently must be wrongheaded in some |
| 21 |
> way. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Oh, and I meant to add here: |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Posting in plain-text is not an "amount of pre-specialization needed |
| 26 |
to participate in the community [that] is dangerously prohibitive". |
| 27 |
You post in HTML, you get asked not to. You don't do it again. End of |
| 28 |
story. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
One reason your post generated so many responses is that *everyone* |
| 31 |
has posted once in HTML and been asked not to. Like, everyone on this |
| 32 |
list, so long ago that we've all each forgotten the occasion. We |
| 33 |
posted in HTML, we got asked not to, we didn't do it again, end of |
| 34 |
story. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
We didn't post a 650 word essay on the subject, and the fact that you |
| 37 |
felt compelled to do that is sure to make you the focus of some |
| 38 |
unwanted attention. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
Stroller. |
Archives