> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of jon louis mann
> Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2007 3:13 PM
> To: Killer Bs Discussion
> Subject: holy war
>
> There are times, as with Brin's argument that GWB follows orders
> from Saudi Arabia, th
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Behalf Of Martin Lewis
> Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2007 7:16 AM
> To: Killer Bs Discussion
> Subject: Re: Car free London?
>
> That isn't what you said though, is it? What you said was: "Well,
> technic
when is it okay to contact a person privately? i have had people
contact me to spare me embarrassment and inform me of rules like
bottom posting, etc. others have not been so kind.
jon
It is less a question when it is okay but why is it necessary. I
don't see what is embarrassing about havin
other ad-hominem attacks, including calling you a "twit".
That's not an ad hominem, that's just abuse. Ad hominem is when you
argue that the person is wrong because of some character of that
person, instead of engaging the argument.
Charlie.
GCU Grammatical Correction Maru
maybe h
On Sep 19, 2007, at 3:35 PM, Nick Arnett wrote:
> On 9/19/07, Alberto Monteiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Dave Land wrote:
>>>
>>> Oh, for Krum's sake, Martin. Take a pill.
>>>
>> Crom!!!
>
> I thought it was "Crump."
You have your house gods, I'll have mine, thank you.
Dave
On 9/19/07, Alberto Monteiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Dave Land wrote:
> >
> > Oh, for Krum's sake, Martin. Take a pill.
> >
> Crom!!!
I thought it was "Crump."
Hmm.
Nick
--
Nick Arnett
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Messages: 408-904-7198
___
http://ww
On Wed, 19 Sep 2007, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
>
> Dave Land wrote:
>>
>> Oh, for Krum's sake, Martin. Take a pill.
>>
> Crom!!!
>
> Is today "heresy day"?
It's Talk Like a Pirate Day.
Which, if you believe Pastafarianism is a heresy, might be considered
heretical.
So, Maybe.
Julia
_
There are times, as with Brin's argument that GWB follows orders
from Saudi Arabia, that I believe that reasonable people should not
accept such an argument.
Maybe not direct orders, but there is collusion between the Bush family
and SaudiS that goes back generations. Here is one photo of the pri
On 20/09/2007, at 3:58 AM, Dave Land wrote:
>>
>> I'm not sure what this means. I thought you wanted to discuss the
>> ettiquette of online communication? Why do you have to repeatedly
>> resort to these ad hominems?
>
> I sincerely apologize for this and other ad-hominem attacks that I
> have r
On 9/19/07, jon louis mann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> when is it okay to contact a person privately? i have had people
> contact me to spare me embarrassment and inform me of rules like bottom
> posting, etc. others have not been so kind.
It is less a question when it is okay but why is it n
You have a very precious view of communication. There is no breach of
trust if there is no trust in the first place. I don't know you, I've
never entered into personal correspondence with you, our only
connection is as members of a public forum. You attempted to make a
public conversation private s
Dave Land wrote:
>
> Oh, for Krum's sake, Martin. Take a pill.
>
Crom!!!
Is today "heresy day"?
Alberto Monteiro
--
Crom, I have never prayed to you before. I have no tongue for
it. No one, not even you, will remember if we were good men or bad.
Why we fought, and why we died. All that matt
On 9/19/07, Martin Lewis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Assuming that this exchange took place in the hallway -- that is, in
> > private -- would you then return to the dinner party and tell everyone
> what
> > Dave had said to you in the hallway?
As a dinner guest, if either of you brought
On Sep 19, 2007, at 11:17 AM, Martin Lewis wrote:
> Not necessarily but I wouldn't object if he told everyone what I said.
It is, of course, your business to decide that for yourself.
It is not your business to decide that for me or anyone else.
Dave
__
On 9/19/07, Dave Land <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> If the list wants to continue a discussion of netiquette, I will do my
> best to contribute in a courteous manner.
What, and deprive us of a good fight? To paraphrase Woody Allen, I'll just
tell you to go be fruitful and multiply... but not
On 9/19/07, Nick Arnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Besides which, if we were at a dinner party and you presumed to
> > correct my manners I would not consider it a courtesy and would, in
> > fact, tell you to mind your own fucking business.
>
> Assuming that this exchange took place in the ha
As Steve said,
"The Brin-L weekly chat has been a list tradition for over six
years. Way back on 27 May, 1998, Marco Maisenhelder first set
up a chatroom for the list, and on the next day, he established
a weekly chat time. We've been through several servers, chat
technologies, and even casts of
On Sep 19, 2007, at 10:24 AM, Martin Lewis wrote:
>> Oh, for Krum's sake, Martin. Take a pill.
>
> I'm not sure what this means. I thought you wanted to discuss the
> ettiquette of online communication? Why do you have to repeatedly
> resort to these ad hominems?
I sincerely apologize for this a
On 9/19/07, Martin Lewis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> Besides which, if we were at a dinner party and you presumed to
> correct my manners I would not consider it a courtesy and would, in
> fact, tell you to mind your own fucking business.
Assuming that this exchange took place in the hall
On Sep 19, 2007, at 10:29 AM, Julia Thompson wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Sep 2007, Dave Land wrote:
>
>> Folks,
>>
>> I apologize that I wound up the twit.
>>
>> Dave
>
> Was that really necessary?
>
> Sheesh.
Probably not. Apologies to all, especially Martin.
Personal attacks are not welcome on Brin-L
On 19 Sep 2007, at 18:10, Dave Land wrote:
> On Sep 19, 2007, at 2:01 AM, Martin Lewis wrote:
>
>> On 9/18/07, Dave Land <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
> B) Please do not post emails received off-list to the list without
>the permission of the author.
>
I believe this is so ba
On Sun, 16 Sep 2007, Dave Land wrote:
> Folks,
>
> I apologize that I wound up the twit.
>
> Dave
Was that really necessary?
Sheesh.
Julia
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
On 9/19/07, Dave Land <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> B) Please do not post emails received off-list to the list without
> the permission of the author.
>
> >>> I believe this is so basic that it transcends any list rules.
> >>> But I would qualify: "do not post parts of private e-m
On Sep 19, 2007, at 2:01 AM, Martin Lewis wrote:
> On 9/18/07, Dave Land <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
B) Please do not post emails received off-list to the list without
the permission of the author.
>>> I believe this is so basic that it transcends any list rules.
>>> But I would
On Wed, 19 Sep 2007, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
>
> Dan Minettte blasphemed:
>>
>> There are times, as with Brin's argument that GWB follows orders
>> from Saudi Arabia, that I believe that reasonable people should not
>> accept such an argument.
>>
> !!!
>
> Die, herectic scum!!!
Oh, goody! Holy
Dan Minettte blasphemed:
>
> There are times, as with Brin's argument that GWB follows orders
> from Saudi Arabia, that I believe that reasonable people should not
> accept such an argument.
>
!!!
Die, herectic scum!!!
Alberto Monteiro
___
http:/
On 9/19/07, Dan Minettte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Why would you like to submit that proposition why you have just
> > agreed that I am right?
>
> I didn't. A conversion of 90% of the 8 km or less transits to active
> transportation (which I take to imply self propelled such as hiking, biki
William T Goodall wrote:
>
> Looks like we are inventing new languages faster than the old ones
> are dying off.
>
Maybe the solution is to take any dying human natural language
and create a programming language based on it :-)
"Hello? Help Desk? How do I write a \"Hello world\" in Choctaw+
I saw this email a bit lateso I'm responding out of sequence.
>
> Why would you like to submit that proposition why you have just
> agreed that I am right?
I didn't. A conversion of 90% of the 8 km or less transits to active
transportation (which I take to imply self propelled such as hiki
On 18/09/2007, at 1:47 AM, Dan Minettte wrote:
>
> Calculations show that a car-free inner London scenario equates to
> a 49%
> reduction in emissions7. Because most London car trips are within
> outer
> London, changes in inner London boroughs alone were not found to be
> sufficient to meet
On 9/18/07, Dave Land <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> B) Please do not post emails received off-list to the list without
> >>the permission of the author.
> >>
> > I believe this is so basic that it transcends any list rules.
> > But I would qualify: "do not post parts of private e-mails to th
31 matches
Mail list logo
