On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 11:08:05AM -0400, Michael Poole wrote: > Andrew Suffield writes: > > > My response is simply this: it's lies. I challenge anybody who thinks > > otherwise to present evidence. I sign almost all my outgoing mails; > > this should be easy, if it were true. Find mails from me that "are > > little more than provocations, put-downs, and trolls". Not ones where > > people have interpreted it that way and I've either told them they're > > wrong or ignored them. Ones where it's actually true. Post references > > to this thread. See how many you *actually* get, out of the number of > > mails I send. > > You asked, and so a little bit of Googling produces these: > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2004/06/msg01598.html Looks like a perfectly justified response to me. I don't see how that could be classified as 'provocation' or 'troll', because in no sense did it encourage more discussion - it was quite clearly a statement that he was being ignored because he was just trying to start an argument. I suppose you could claim it was a 'put-down', but I claim it is a factually accurate description of the parent mail and I challenge anybody to prove otherwise. > http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2004/06/msg00166.html I can see nothing in this mail that could be even remotely like that. Explain your claim. > http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2005/05/msg00036.html And again. > http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2005/04/msg00248.html A restatement of what other people had previously said, and I still see no way you can classify this as "little more than provocations, put-downs, and trolls". > perhaps http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2005/03/msg00378.html > (which I would call devoid of useful information but heavy in insults) Insults? WTF? Precise quoting and explanations please, I see none here. -- .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield : :' : http://www.debian.org/ | `. `' | `- -><- |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature