Re: [OT] aargh.. the big swirl of offtopicness sucks me in, too. help!
On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 12:04:21 -0600
Mike McCarty <Mike.McCarty@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> Liam O'Toole wrote:
> > On Wed, 07 Mar 2007 23:37:58 -0600
> > Mike McCarty <Mike.McCarty@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Liam O'Toole wrote:
> >>
> >>>There is nothing OT about my contributions. This started as a
> >>>question of whether totalitarian regimes can tolerate diversity.
> >>>I have consistently been arguing that they can not.
> >>
> >>AFAICT, everything you wrote is OT in regards to installing,
> >>maintaining, and using Debian.
> >>
> >>Mike
> >
> >
> > So it is. And you're reading messages way down deep in a thread
> > indicated as "[OT]" because ...?
>
> I don't want to restart the discussion. However, to answer
> your question
>
> (1) The people who are high-level OT posters hijack threads
> with decent content.
>
> (2) People sometimes hijack threads which have drifted miserably
> off-topic with another on-topic discussion.
>
> I mentioned this before, that the way it is done here is making
> it difficult just to delete threads. Also, when a thread has been
> deleted, and more material arrives, then something which looks
> deep to those participating in it pops to the top. That's what
> I saw, a message at the top.
Fair enough. Thanks for the explanation.
>
> I responded to your message due to the extremity of your
> statement, and how you obviously seem to think that being
> OT in an OT thread is a bad thing, while being OT in a whole
> mail echo is not.
The statement appears extreme only until you realise that the "OT" in
this case was expressed not in relation to Debian-related matters, but
to another subject entirely!
BTW, I think you've managed to demonstrate point (2) above.
--
Liam
Reply to: