--- Joe Vaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >It appears to me that the author of the above >statement is NOT practicing what he is preaching -- >i.e. Chain letters in any form shouldnt be >circulated! Then why cc a whole bunch of people who >are already members of Goanet? >
The author of the above email, quite predictably, fails to understand the meaning of chain letters. Chain letters are forwarded emails that are passed on from one person to another. They are not specific original responses to mailing list posts. I cced my post to some people because I wanted to give them advance notice of what I wrote in response to the above post, since some of us had discussed the issue of urban legends on Goanet, in private. I am aware of no rules that prevent people from ccing one's emails to others. > > However, what he has not cared to comment on, is > whats so harmful in the > message below: > I have already commented on all kinds of commentary on the urban legends in question. I do not consider that the present one from the above author has anything original or insightful to offer. It is simply a superfluous and frivolous defense of garbage, perhaps resorted to out of guilt, and/or dislike of people referred to Sandeep Heble's recent post, in positive light. > >To this writer, it seems a mere waste of time and >energy scrutinizing/debunking a post that already has >a clear message. > To this writer posting of urban legends, plagiarized material, and lies and half-truths in any form are really the primary waste of time and energy. > >Of course I cannot say the same for critics who >apparently enjoy such endeavors and frivolous >exercises. :) > This critic considers it his duty to expose the falsehoods and fabrications contained in the urban legends that infest internet forums. Cheers, Santosh