On Fri, Aug 12, 2005 at 04:32:52PM -0400, Michael Poole wrote: > Andrew Suffield writes: > > > On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 11:09:16PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote: > >> My response is simply > >> this: it's lies. I challenge anybody who thinks otherwise to present > >> evidence. > > > > So far (three days) we've had one person try, and give up after I > > explained every case. I think that says a lot for the accuracy of the > > accusations. > > It says a lot more about how much you regularly misrepresent plain > writing to put your spin on issues. You think you rebutted my > arguments; I think you actually illustrated that I was correct from > the start. The real reason I gave up is that it is clear that neither > of us is convincing the other. This is not a game, and it's not a debate; I do not have to convince you. Back up your accusations or abandon them. If you don't back them up, "innocent until proven guilty" says they aren't valid. > Descending to your flawed level of rhetoric, it is also telling that > nobody else has stepped up to argue that your posts were acceptable. I have asked people not to do that (at least, I think I've asked people; if I missed anybody: please don't). I shall not permit this to be reduced to a popularity contest or a vote. These are issues of fact, not opinion. -- .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield : :' : http://www.debian.org/ | `. `' | `- -><- |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature