> I apologise for making it unclear that I was talking about the tone > of the conversation as a whole rather than your comments specifically.
I think you're right. You WERE talking about the conversation as a whole. However, I interpreted your comments as "This whole debate is in attack mode, and Emilys' comments bought my attention to it. It's so serious that I need to bring the lists' attention to it, as well." That's why I was so defensive. This has happened to me in the past, with a previous list. People were even questioning whether or not I was who I said I was (I was a young, probably mildly gifted pre-teen at the time)! Not an excuse, but since I couldn't read your body language, I jumped to conclusions based on past experiences. Sorry about that. > My apologies for not having got to that point in the conversation at > the time I replied. My assumption was that you did. You need to think, read, think, and then write (and think some more afterward). Don't worry though, I forgive you, and I'll forget about it. Emily On Aug 10, 2009, at 9:47 AM, Surreptitiousness wrote: > Emily Monroe wrote: >>> This conversation seems to be getting a little steeped in "attack" >>> mode, doesn't it? >>> >> >> That was an honest, legitimate hypothetical question of mine. I >> addressed it primarily to Will, and secondarily to everybody. I never >> mean to attack anyone. I wouldn't live with my conscious if I had >> lived a life like that. If I did unintentionally attack *anyone*, >> then >> I owe an apology to Will and the list that I'm offering now. >> > I apologise for making it unclear that I was talking about the tone of > the conversation as a whole rather than your comments specifically. >>> So my question at this point in the debate would be to ask myself >>> why someone who lives "in a place where there isn't any library for >>> hours (or days even)" would be overly bothered about verifying >>> right that second. >>> >> >> I didn't mean to imply that they would be bothered about verifying >> references right that second. I was starting to read into this debate >> (and maybe it's just me) that every Wikipedian should be bothered >> about verifying right that second. I was proven wrong when Will >> pointed out that that wasn't his point. >> > My apologies for not having got to that point in the conversation at > the > time I replied. > > > > _______________________________________________ > WikiEN-l mailing list > WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
