This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-talk
mailing list for the cygwin project.
RE: Who hasn't been badly flamed?
- From: "Gary R. Van Sickle" <g dot r dot vansickle at worldnet dot att dot net>
- To: "'The Cygwin-Talk Malingering List'" <cygwin-talk at cygwin dot com>
- Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2005 18:10:53 -0500
- Subject: RE: Who hasn't been badly flamed?
- Reply-to: The Cygwin-Talk Malingering List <cygwin-talk at cygwin dot com>
> From: Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes
> Sent: Sunday, September 11, 2005 7:00 AM
> To: The Cygwin-Talk Malingering List
> Subject: Re: Who hasn't been badly flamed?
>
> On Sat, Sep 10, 2005 at 04:35:36AM -0500, Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
> > Christopher Faylor wrote:
> > > Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
>
> > > >Ok Chris, I'll ask you this yet again: Please point out
> an instance
> > > >of where I have "flamed" you, so that I may apologize,
> and we can
> > > >both put the terrible tragedy behind us. Please again note that
> > > >taking you to task for poor behavior (or even what you
> would term
> > > >"trolling") is not a "flame" by anybody's definition.
>
> > > For the record, yes, I do think that you have flamed but I don't
> > > require an apology.
>
> > Again you misunderstand: it is *I* who have the requirement
> here. If
> > I have "flamed" you as you claim I have, seems to me it's only fair
> > that you give me the opportunity to apologize for it, no?
>
> I have a recollection of your posting what could only be
> termed flames,
I believe you are not recalling accurately.
> but have absolutely no desire to reread
> through such dreck in the archives looking for a link to give
> you.
Indeed. Seems that there are a few people here that would rather baselessly
malign me than search the archives in vain and have to eat their words.
> Especially since you seem unlikely to acknowlege it at such.
>
Did you miss this part sir?:
"Please point out an instance of where I have "flamed" you, so that I may
apologize, and we can both put the terrible tragedy behind us."
If it's "flame", let's put it out. If it ain't, let's stop the false
accusations, huh?
> Instead, I invite you to privately reread all your messages
> criticising others and reflect upon them.
No, you're the one doing the accusing, it's your job to do the legwork. If
indeed there are "all [these] messages criticising others" flowing from me,
it should surely be trivial to find just one example that's a "flame" in the
archives, should it not?
--
Gary R. Van Sickle