On Monday 05 June 2006 21:43, houghi wrote: > On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 09:18:51PM -0700, Randall R Schulz wrote: > > Why am I the bad guy here? > > Because of your wording. > > > Because I forced those who consider > > themselves the police of this list to actually say what is and is > > not on-topic for this list and to use words as they're actually > > defined in English? > > That is so tragic, it is almost funny. At this moment what is on > topic has not changed. What is on-topic is still very clear to > everybody else, exept apparently you. Do you already understand what > a 'community' is?
I certainly do. A community is _people_ not _projects_. You are _not_ discussing _the community_, you're discussing _the work_. No matter how many times you repeat it, you're not going to change English to suit your misunderstanding. And I am not trying to change anything. I don't care how the list is defined, but saying it's about "the community" makes as much sense as saying it's about cheese. > > I did _not_ come to this with any preconceptions nor did I insist > > one way or another. > > Yes, you did. Going on and on and on and on is what I would call > 'insisting'. You don't know what's in my mind. I insisted only until I got an answer, and it did not come from you. You're still insisting on the non-answer. > > I did not care what the answer was. > > Yes, you did. Otherwise you would not be not happy with the answer. You still don't know what is or is not in my mind and what makes me happy or unhappy. Whatever you all want this list to be is fine with me. It's not my place to dictate what it is. I have never been confused about that. But if you won't make a clear statement of what that purpose is, you can very well expect inappropriate posts. And that's what you have. And that's why you have it. You make a statement like "it's about the community" and since no one can make any sense out of that (in this context), they post the questions they have. > > I was only trying > > to get a clear statement, and it was like pulling teeth to do so. > > You got a statement and you did not like it. That was the reason you > kept on going. Seems pretty insisting. Even when you told that one > person gave you a satisfying answer, you kept bugging about others > not giving the answer you wanted to hear. That is what you have insisted from the start, but repeating a non-answer and expecting me to consider it an answer is what you were and are still doing. I was satisfied with Graham's answer, since it was explicit, meaningful and couched in language and used words that were all completely consistent. And I said as much, more than once. I could not and cannot acknowledge the same for you because you persist with the nonsense non-answer. > > Don't worry. I'll not be asking any questions in your private > > playground, > > You already have. The first 7 words of your posting were a question. There. You're simply being perverse. I take it from this that you just want to argue. I guess you must know you're wrong but cannot admit it. > > whatever you decide to call it and whatever misuse of > > English you decide to use in describing it. > > This is exactly the wording why you are 'the bad guy'. With the above > you asume that no good wording will be found. Such an assumtion is > degrading. As you have better understanding of the use of English > words, or so you seem to claim, that is something you should have > noticed. I can't tell if you're deliberately twisting my words or just don't understand what I wrote. Perhaps you can contemplate it from the perspective that possibly it's another joke you're not getting. > houghi RRS --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
