Dear Dave, I will not answer to your provocations & wrongly interpretation of the situation; just let me say a few things:
first of all, I sended you privately a mail with the address I asked to subscribe, on december the 2nd, the 6th and the 12th (checked); No Any (I insist no one of these mails) was aggressive or unpolish so feel free to accuse me from all the things you want to satisfy your need of aggression, I haven't said nor thought the things you're accusing me. I regret that such a problem still isn't resolved, and I apollogy for the excessive noise I had Never Never desired myself. It's uncorrect the way you handled me but I can't help if you decide to do so against me. Merry Christmas anyway! I will see how does I can resolve the problem. Labrador On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 01:08:12PM -0500, Dave Mielke wrote: > [quoted lines by Labrador on 2010/12/12 at 15:49 +0100] > > >Well then: > > > >- why aren't you helping me ? > > Probably because I had no time when you asked, and then forgot about the > issue. > > At this point, hwoever, my answer is changing. I resist those who think that > they can command how I spend my time. Even my manager at my paying job > doesn't > speak to me the way you are. > > >it's not my fault that your Mailman machine doesn't respond to classical > >subscription requests ? > > And it's not my fault either. > > As I proposed in my last message, why don't you figure out which setting > needs > to be tweaked and then let me know what it is? You'd probably end up spending > less time doing that then you have yelling at me. > > >or are we banned because it doesn't work until now ? > > No one has been banned. > > >- why aren't you responding to mail directly sended to you with specific ask > >for subscribing a certain address ? > > I no longer remember when you sent me a private message. If I didn't respond > to > it, though, there were likely two reasons. The first is that, at least so > far, > I have no idea what might be causing your problem. The second is that it'd > likely take me a lot of time to figure it out and I didn't have the time then > to invest in it. > > >>It's all too > >> easy for any of us to think that our own problems are more important than > >>those > >> of others, > > > >You said this! I don't thought so! > > Then why are you insisting so vehemently that I have to drop everything just > to > solve your problem? > > >I've no any problem with no any list changes operated currently with lots of > >other mlists; > >so I would aks you please please please to be a little bit more colaborative > >and help me since it doesn't work as expected: > > I guess it's because I'm a very rude person. > > >I send you the mail to subscribe privately, and that's the only thing we > >probably can do, > > You've been very rude toward me lately so I'm becoming more and more > disinterested in this problem. It's now lower on my priority list than it > used > to be. > > >it's now ten days ago and the problem is still the same: > >are you happy with this ? > > Yes, because I don't think it's right to feed someone's rudenss by giving in > to > it. Why should the loudest person always get the best service? > > >that's why I asked for helping! > >but if it will take ten days more I will consider this as a refusal to help! > > If that's the way you're going to speak to me then, as of right now, I refuse > to help with this problem. You don't need to wait 10 more days to make that > decision. > > >but isn't it possible to ask to a second person to co-administrate the list > >so that there should be a kind of "permanence" ? I use do so since I was in > >the hospital in 2009 and so unavailable! > > no, there's no need since your rudeness has removed your problem from the > table. > > Maybe you think I'm now truly being rude. The fact is that you've been going > out of your way to point out just how rude and unhelpful you think I've been > for a few days now, and I wouldn't want to turn all your claims into lies by > becoming helpful. > > >> I'm too lazy to go looking for it. Why not just retype it > >>here so > >> that it's right in front of me. That'd be less typing than the > >> instructions > >>of > >> where I need to go to find it. > > > >Dave please listen: i have tried both the "by mail" requests and the online > >requests surfing to the mailman/listinfo/ page corresponding to my current > >e-mail address: > >in both cases it fails. > > Now you're even accusing me of not listening. When have I ever not listened > to > someone? > > It's actually you who weren't listening. Read my statement very carefully. I > simply asked you to retype the address which is giving you problems rather > than > order me to go find some previous message you sent which contains it. That'd > mean less typing for you and less work for me. What's wrong with that? > > It seems, though, that you much prefer all of this needless typing to try to > tell me how rotten I am. That's truly not helpful to anyone, and probably > very > boring to the others who have to read it. > > >You're the one and only who can fix it for me, really! > > No, I'm not, as I've decided (see above) to not care about it anymore. > > -- > Dave Mielke | 2213 Fox Crescent | The Bible is the very Word of God. > Phone: 1-613-726-0014 | Ottawa, Ontario | 2011 May 21 is the Day of > Judgement. > EMail: [email protected] | Canada K2A 1H7 | 2011 Oct 21 is the End of the > World. > http://FamilyRadio.com/ | http://Mielke.cc/bible/ > _______________________________________________ > This message was sent via the BRLTTY mailing list. > To post a message, send an e-mail to: [email protected] > For general information, go to: http://mielke.cc/mailman/listinfo/brltty _______________________________________________ This message was sent via the BRLTTY mailing list. To post a message, send an e-mail to: [email protected] For general information, go to: http://mielke.cc/mailman/listinfo/brltty
