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

Re: Technical committee resolution

On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 16:41:44 +0100, Josip Rodin <joy@entuzijast.net> said: 

> On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 09:45:59PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> [...]

> I was hoping for the best, but expecting the worst - I expected a
> point-by-point reply <sigh> but I was hoping that I wouldn't see one
> because I thought that you would see that I was just trying to explain
> the two opposing takes of the bigger picture, which both have some
> merit.

        I think your meta description of your post does not match the
 substance of your past, really.  There does not seem to be much on the
 big picture, and far more on hectoring other people.

>> I think I do understand Clint's maverick stance better than you
>>  credit me for. 

> I'm sorry, but that information isn't really logical to me and the
> other observers. We haven't seen anything much to support those
> claims, but we have seen a fair share of flaming.

        You seem to have a problem differentiating between understanding
 something and not thinking it silly or worth dismissing.

> Anyway, I'll go away now and try to do something more productive


> than to keep arguing subtle points about judgement.

        Again, your description of your previous posts seems somewhat
 more flattering than the posts themselves.  Subtle points of judgement
 while continuing to hector away on other people's lack thereof does not
 seem to fit.

< Now I once again hope that you don't reply in such an irritated manner,
> but history says to expect it again. :/

        I'd be less irritated were your posts less condescending.  If
 you truly want a conversation, get off the high horse. Other people
 would then not get a crick in their necks talking to you.

Anyone who says he can see through women is missing a lot. Groucho Marx
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>  
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C

Reply to: