> From: leaking pen > > Pardon, but i was responding to Mr. Wesley, as I had > missed the thread in which he had made the statement, > and was quite sure he would read THIS thread as well. > I was not responding to you. Perhaps YOU should read > posts more carefully before assuming that something is > aimed at you that isn't. You seemed rather eager to take > the finger that wasn't pointed at you.
Greetings again, Mr. Leak, Mr. Lawrence has already spoken rather eloquently on this point. However, tell you what. I'll work on my over eager fickle finger of accusation if you try working on your addressing skills. You will note that I often address whom I'm responding to very clearly, usually at the beginning of any post I make. It helps avoid potential confusions as to whom my comments are actually being addressed to. I think you may have missed the fact that I created a brand new subject thread where I quoted a statement from Mr. Wesley. In my brand new subject thread Mr. Wesley has NEVER MADE a direct contribution to it, so how can you assume that everyone would naturally understand that your comments were actually addressed to him? Quite frankly, I would have offered up a sincere public apology had you received both Mr. Wesley's post and mine, AND that both posts were made in the same subject thread. However, as you have stated, at the time of your post you had ONLY received MY follow-up post, and not Mr. Wesley's. That's because Mr. Wesley has, so far, not made any follow-up posts to my new subject thread. Again, how do you assume that everyone would naturally take your comments as directed at Mr. Wesley? I therefore feel justified in repeating: Please read my posts more carefully, and respond accordingly As Mr. Lawrence as already suggested, simply addressing whom your comments were meant for would have alleviated a lot of confusion you are directly responsible for creating. Goodness gracious me! Did I just start a flame war? Gag me with a spoon! Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com
