I think Bascule needs to loosen up. Although you had a point to make, it was
much too long, especially being so OT. You originally annoyed maybe a few,
maybe even just one. But how many have you annoyed now? More than a few I'd
say. You should have used the KISS method, or took the discussion OFF the
list. But Bob was nit picking, and Bob needs to work on his diplomatic
skills. He should have just said something like, "please include the message
you're responding to so that we know the whole story". This is especailly
germane right now because the list has been slow the past several weeks, and
it's harder than usual to follow threads. Overall it was a non-issue, IMHO.
-=Tom Wang=-
-----------------------------
Pentium 100 MHz = the new speed limit!
OS2 Warp is out now!
Why wait for Windows 95???
Bob Root wrote:
>Why do I think that the message below has anything to do with me, and >how
>many others have wondered the same thing. It would be appreciated >if
>people
>could consider if what they are replying to has meaning to everyone >on the
>list. Thank you.
>Bob Root
>>On Mon, 05 Jun 2000, you wrote:
>>thanks flupke
>>
>>bascule
bascule wrote:
>regarding 'run-on sentences' and the implicit assumption of courtesy,
>
>the minor flame fest that briefly sputtered upon my publicly thanking a
>contributor to this list surprised me, true, i did not quote any of the
>pleasing previous answer since no quote was necessary, it was a thankyou
>after all. as for courtesy being implied, well that's a nice idea but
>(and here i digress but i'm sure that readers will be tolerant) the
>reason i teach my child politeness is not -and i have explained this to
>her- because the individual rules or words involved are particularly
>meaningful, but rather, that the effort to follow them ensures thought
>takes place concerning ones actions and speech, i hardly need point out
>what can happen in the world when actions and speech are not preceded by
>thought (though of course mere thoughtfulness is not always enough), to
>return, perhaps i have thoughtlessly broached some rule of the list that
>i am unaware of, if so then i humbly apologise, as a newbie in general
>terms as well as linux in particular i would welcome any polite
>instruction on the matter.
>
>however, surely if every message posted were to fully quote the previous
>than any thread of great length becomes a serious download for plain old
>56k users like me. clearly most people choose what to quote and how
>much, this is presumably done on the need for clear communication and
>can sometimes take into account the intended recipient. as i attempted
>to point out in the other thread on this list, not all conversations are
>intelligible if one enters in the middle, i for one delete messages that
>i can not respond to and do not hold info i need, therefore i often read
>missives that hold little meaning for me, this has yet to annoy me.
>
>the (relatively) anonymous mailing list has strong psychological
>differences to a conversation 'in the flesh', anger is more quickly
>aroused and more quickly returned, i strive to avoid this and, i like to
>hope, usually succeed. of course, no-one is perfect and perhaps this
>post is evidence of that, it's certainly not very linux related, but
>linux is a part of life and i like my life happy and wish the same
for
>all, (almost a non sequitur but not quite).
>
>for readers who wonder what this post is about, i apologise again, the
>truth is, i feel slighted by a previous post(s) and i'm not exactly sure
>why, this epistle is the result.
>
>feel free to burn effigies of me if you have been annoyed by this, i am
>5'8 in old money, chubby, a tad plain and i have long hair if that
>helps.
>
>bascule
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
