This is exactly how I would have responded recently given the opportunity. Sadly, I wasn't given the opportunity and I'm sorry that the list has had to see all that dirty laundry being aired. In future I'll be sending any attempt at humour to my local political correctness consultant for censorship.
Regards, Anthony Farr ----- Original Message ----- From: "dick graham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Bob, my sincere apologies if you took this the wrong way. Absolutely not > intended as an insult, just a light hearted joke. Please don't take it > seriously. > > DG > > > At 08:21 PM 10/17/02 +0100, you wrote: > >Hi, > > > >Thursday, October 17, 2002, 3:38:39 PM, you wrote: > > > > > With all due respect to you, Bob, it appears that this particular duck > > > caught some of Paal's lead. By the way, is your middle name Bruce or "The > > > Who" ? > > > >we all have the right to be as skeptical or as credulous as we please, > >and to make our opinions known, but we don't have the right to make > >unprovoked ad hominem remarks. We've just been through an example of > >what often happens when people do make such remarks. > > > >I've been on this list for some time now, and I was on it while The > >Who was active. I fail to see how you can make such a comparison based > >on a couple of skeptical postings about yet another rumour about an > >unannounced camera. Since you don't have a sound basis for the comparison > >I can only take the comparison with The Who as an unprovoked insult, which > >drops you right down to the bottom of my estimation, along with all the > >other people who toss personal insults around so freely. > > > >Bob > > >
