Quoting Frans Pop (email@example.com): > You did presume I'd do that with this: > On Sunday 23 August 2009, Christian Perrier wrote: > I think that Frans will verey quickly suggest the right explanation > > Instead, trace them to the end yourself. > > So, I think you did deserve the remark (obviously, otherwise I wouldn't > have made it). That sentence was just a guess because: - at the time I wrote this, I knew I couldn't investigate things further, even obvious ones - I knew you were following the thread. So, it was not asking for your diagnostic, but just presuming you would end up with the right conclusion. Your interpretation was "I ask Frans to complete the diagnosis". So, what I need to accept is that your interpretation of my words was different from the initial intent. I'll be more careful in the future. > > Cheers, > FJP > > P.S. As usual, the remark was *not* meant as a personal attack. > You are way too quick to read that into it. It's similar to the recurring > "that idea sucks" versus "you suck" discussions on the lists. > My responses to your rant are much more personal of course, but then the > rant itself made you deserve that too. Something you clearly fail to see are the consequence of things you can say (or write) *from the perspective of the person* you're talking to. I have sufferred from the same for years before my paid work bringed me in a position where it's part of my job to manage such interactions and understand the consequence of words. As you see above, I still fail from time to time..:-) Hopefully, this is the conclusion of this thread.
Description: Digital signature