This is the mail archive of the cygwin mailing list for the Cygwin project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

RE: Bespoke installations: simple elegance of setup.exe when setup.ini is absent

Chris, Chris, Chris.  I can imagine how anxious you must be, having to wait
up to several full hours for my responses to your avoid-the-issue posts, but
really you only have yourself to blame.  We could both go on to much more
productive things if you'd simply admit that you were out of line and have
been on far too many occaisions, and promise to behave better in the future.
And then, if you actually do behave better in the future, why, in thirty
years or so, we'll look back over a homebrew to your inexplicable rudeness
and this epiphany you're having after having been called on it enough times,
and O, how we'll laugh!

(BTW: that's not the royal "we", that's the Cygwin community "we", which is
lucky enough to be witnessing this historic event.  I know you believe that
you and I are some sort of "internet soulmates" or something, but, well, no,
we ain't.  And that's the "you and I" "we" there, lest anybody become any
more confused.)

Ok, fine, I'll write a short response for you here to tide you over, until
such time as I can address your aforementioned avoid-the-issue posts.  Don't
say I never did nothin for ya.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: 
> [] On Behalf Of Christopher Faylor
> Sent: Monday, May 02, 2005 4:16 PM
> To:
> Subject: Re: Bespoke installations: simple elegance of 
> setup.exe when setup.ini is absent
> On Mon, May 02, 2005 at 03:39:51PM -0500, Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
> >- I am glad that Chris' comments clarified that.  Let us all 
> hope that 
> >he applies this helpful service across the board, and not just for 
> >those who call him on his often bizarre behavior here.  Well, except 
> >for the false accusations of dishonesty part, I don't think 
> that's very 
> >helpful to anybody.
> Yes, Gary, I'll be glad to respond to you again.  You have 
> only but to profess indignation at a harmless turn of phrase 

You would characterize your deliberate, public, and unwarranted questioning
of my honesty as "harmless", Chris?  Are you so sure that such bizarre
behavior does you no harm?

> and I'll be there to provide you with the outlet you are 
> apparently looking for.

Who's looking for what now?  Is that what your inexplicable rudeness and now
false accusations of dishonesty are?  Some sort of outlet for your pent up
hatred of the Cygwin community, or "the Man", or humanity, or "the World"?
One is indeed drawn to such a conclusion, in the absence of any other
logical explanation.  If that is so, let me ask you: Is it working?  Do your
snide comments ease the pain, Chris?  Do they, Chris?

Do they?

> To just to address your hope -- with my awful email style how 
> could I resist putting anyone in their place who dared step 
> out of line?

I don't know how, which is why I'm hoping you'll be able to apply this new
standard in the same fair and even-handed fashion that you've applied your
"puzzlingly unwarranted rudeness" policy.  Heretofore, I am unaware of any
instance in which you "kept anybody honest" and/or accused them of
dishonesty.  You certainly have to agree that implementing such a policy
will be a much more involved task than randomly spraying the Cygwin mailing
lists with rude comments.  It will involve many hours of checking the time
between various posts, poring over cvs logs, and who knows what other kinds
of time-consuming research.  I am well aware that you are already saddled
with more than enough work.  I simply hope you're up to the additional load.

>  Are you afraid that your strange power over me, 

Nobody has anything to fear from my strange power over you, Chris.

> where I immediately start being helpful after you've made one 
> of your every-few-weeks vituperative forays into this mailing 
> list, might cause me to shirk my duties?

Well, I don't know what "vituperative" means, but if it's something along
the lines of "When Chris is called on his inappropriate behavior, he
temporarily 'shapes up', you can set your watch by it", well, frankly, yes.

> Have no fear Mr.  Mesmer, I'll do my duty.  I can resist your 
> powers just enough for that, at least.

Excellent.  I shall await with bated breath the first instance of you
falsely accusing somebody else on this list of dishonesty!  What an exciting
time to be a member of the Cygwin community[1]!

Gary R. Van Sickle
[1] By "member of the Cygwin community" I of course mean what everybody
knows I mean, no more, no less.  Don't want to get two false accusations of
dishonesty in a row!

Unsubscribe info:
Problem reports:

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]