On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 05:09:35PM +0200, Enrico Zini wrote: > On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 03:23:18PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 04:10:04PM +0200, Enrico Zini wrote: > > > On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 02:13:12PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote: > > Did you not read my original mail? I thought it quite clear. I'll > > repeat the relevant paragraph here: > > Thanks for providing a nice example to the discussion. I asked for more > information, and you just quoted your previous message, adding none. You asked for specific information which I had already provided. I predict that you will continue to ignore my point by claiming that I haven't provided any further information, while never asking any specific questions. > You claim your point is not being addressed, yet you don't do anything > to help people addressing it. I have done all that I can. > In the meantime, you indulge in a > personal attack. Oh look, another claim of some nebulous 'personal attack' without any evidence. I invite people to read my previous mail (it's not long) and see for themselves. > If I used your words, I'd add that your mail is a needlessly stupid > thing, and a good example of why things are the way they are[1]. > [1] Randomly taken from messages of yours in debian-devel. Without citations or context, of course. -- .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield : :' : http://www.debian.org/ | `. `' | `- -><- |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature