Hi, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> To get back to something *concrete*, would anyone find it sexist if the
> phrase was "So easy your secretary or your boss could use it"? This pairs
> a stereotypically male and a sterotypically female profession, both
> stereotypically clueless.
These words are also
Andrew Suffield wrote:
> If people address issues rather than personalitites then everything
> you have said is completely irrelevant, because they aren't going to
> be perturbed by the "speech" pattern of the people they are talking
> to, so we can phrase things however we damn well please.
You'r
On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 09:28:12PM +, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 09:14:52AM -0500, Evan Prodromou wrote:
> > AS> The rest of your mail was based on similarly dumb ideas.
> >
> > Which ideas do I have that are so dumb?
>
> > That you shouldn't be mean when you don't h
On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 09:14:52AM -0500, Evan Prodromou wrote:
> AS> The rest of your mail was based on similarly dumb ideas.
>
> Which ideas do I have that are so dumb?
> That you shouldn't be mean when you don't have to?
Yes, that's hippie shit.
If you s/shouldn't/don't need to/ then it'
> "AS" == Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Me> Within our project, if you consider the most effective DDs*,
Me> you're going to also be thinking of the most reasonable,
Me> thoughtful, and friendly ones.
AS> No, I'd say that's entirely wrong.
I'd say that you're be
5 matches
Mail list logo
