[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Craig Sanders

On Tue, Nov 14, 2000 at 01:29:04AM +0100, Jan Martin Mathiassen wrote:
> "strong language" differs from person to person. what craig writes is
> stronger than my average language, yes, but i'm not offended by it. i
> probably wouldn't even be offended by it (well, i would at first, then i'd
> look at it twice and *think*). why? because i'd think it through and either
> realize the poster is a total twit, and thus not worth my time... or i've
> made a mistake, and i should take the criticism to heart and try to improve
> myself.
Errrr, well, the thing is it doesn't really change. You've got your appropriate
language and then you've got your troll (That's mine!) and flame language.
Young Craig chose to use inappropriate in his infalmatory letter. 
Whether it was right of Thomas to post that letter is now irrelevant for the
response was ill written. These things can be kept civilized.

> there's a reason thomas gets shot at. he most likely gets MORE flak than he
> deserves, but he set himself up for it by publicly posting about a personal
> issue between him and craig. so if thomas is clever, he'll learn to re-read
> the mails he gets a few times, write up something, read through that a few
> times, think things through for 5 minutes or more, re-read both mails again,
> check for new posts in the thread (if any), and THEN maybe sending it off.
> he'll look like less of an egyptian mongoose that way.
> i'm not saying craig wasn't rude (he was, definitely... but he was also
> right), i'm just saying thomas took it one step further (sans the language,
> of course).
His degree of accruacy is simply irrelevant, since one should _NEVER_ resort
to cheap name calling and unwitty remarks. I don't know the exact details of
this unfortunate clash between the forces of light, but I do know that Thomas
behaved more appropriately. Let's leave the trolling and name calling for 
#linuxhelp@efnet, it'll do wonders to your stress.

	Roger that, Yotam Rubin

Reply to: