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

Re: What's best quick fix for broken kde metapackage?

Hi ben,

I have ready your message (below).  

I am sending you this note because, based on your very last comment below, I am
concerned that somewhere along the communication channel part of the message I
sent to you did not get to you.  (See below.)

--- ben <benfoley@rcn.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday 19 February 2002 03:01 am, tluxt2@yahoo.com wrote:
> > Hi ben,
> >
> > I read your message with some interest.  In order to help me give you a
> > response on par with your interest, will you please provide me some
> > clarification about some things that are ambiguous to me about your
> > message? TIA.
> >
> ...
> > PS: I am very busy currently, but I will make an effort to respond to you
> > within a week of your reply, at most, and perhaps within a few days.
> >
> solely out of a consideration that you seem to be unable to exert for the 
> benefit of others, i accept that you are, for whatever reason, but, 
> nonetheless, by your own admission, possibly unable to respond to this 
> promptly.
> as for your inability to properly interpret my intentions, i can only say 
> that the ambiguity you suggest was a part of my post to you is a further 
> product of your arrogance. you are rude. you are obnoxious. you assume a 
> position of special entitlement without the slightest attempt to accord 
> respect to those to whom respect is due. on the basis of constructing a 
> howto, you assume the right to exact obligations of notice from those whose 
> proven efforts far exceed anything you offer. you render accusations of 
> delinquency that are entirely unwarranted and unjustified.
> is this clear enough? is there a trace of ambiguity here?
> you owe chris cheney an apology. you owe the list an apology for your 
> attempted disparagement of the effort he invests in what he does. your 
> attempt to assert obligation where none exist is antithetical to the whole 
> premise of what debian is about. 
> as to whether or not i wanted a response to the original questions, the 
> answer is yes, i do want a considered response to 

> those questions--which, i 
> notice, you haven't taken the effort to quote.

That last statement does not make sense to me.  I did quote them.  (It appears
in my message, at the end, after a line of "="'s.)  The quote came through to
me in the bounce of my message, through the list, back to me.  It is also
clearly shown in Konq at the archive page:

I mention this because if someone reading my message did not see that part,
they would have an incomplete understanding of that message.

In order for me to get you the best considered response possible, please
re-check my message in your mail program, and on that web page.  Please then
reply to this message letting me know either:
1) That you do now see that I quoted your full message, 
   and the method I used in doing so, or
2) clarifying your statement above.


> ben

Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Sports - Coverage of the 2002 Olympic Games

Reply to: