On Sat, Sep 04, 2004 at 10:10:02PM +0200, Christoph Haas wrote: > On Sat, Sep 04, 2004 at 02:39:25PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > > > So true. Some people here choose a 'discussion style' that is very > > > insulting. Unless I know most people in private (which is completely > > > impossible in this list) I try to choose a tone that doesn't offend > > > anyone. > > > > Which is utterly impossible to do. Point in question: I find > > your patronizing style utterly offensive. > > I didn't mean to patronize anyone. Yeah, well, nobody "meant" to insult you either. If wishes were horses then we'd all have horsemeat for lunch. Doesn't stop you being offensive, nor is it a valid excuse. > > This style of taking pot shots at a large fgroup of people, but hiding > > behind the shield of "I did not name names, so I can't possibly be > > insulting" is highly irritating and insulting. > > Naming names hadn't improved anything IMHO. As I said I expect the > flamers to not understand their problem. Just a little more respect and > politeness would help the situation. Show some then, if you think it would help so much. If nothing else it'll be amusing to see you try. Currently you are showing gross disrespect and bad manners. Personally I don't care, but since you apparently do, maybe you should do something about the example you set. -- .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield : :' : http://www.debian.org/ | `. `' | `- -><- |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature