| | Re: Can we help? Larry Pieniazek
|
| | What follows are my personal views, not official statements of position but I'm willing to wager that they are close enough as not to make much of a difference. (...) This post by you: (URL) was not, in my view, "mocking someone", nor did I say it (...) (20 years ago, 5-Nov-04, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | |
| | | | Re: Can we help? Richie Dulin
|
| | | | (...) -snip- (...) But you said in (URL) that sarcasm didn't really have a place. (...) Noted. (...) Do you consider the part where I used almost your exact words in response to your post the part which is mocking? If so, how was your post not a (...) (20 years ago, 7-Nov-04, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Can we help? Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | (...) It is part of the mocking in that post, yes. (...) I don't view it that way. Not all sarcasm is mocking. (...) I don't feel the original FUT was wrong. Admonitions (which my post was, although poorly structured) belong in the original group (...) (20 years ago, 7-Nov-04, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Can we help? Richie Dulin
|
| | | | (...) Then why did you not comment on it (or any other part of the post which was, in your view mocking) in your response? Why didnt you point out that *that* post was mocking and that I should not do it? And if that was only part of the mocking (...) (20 years ago, 9-Nov-04, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Can we help? Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | In lugnet.admin.general, Richie Dulin wrote: (snip) I am not going to play second-guessing games with you, Richie. The points that needed to be made have been made. You can heed them or not, as you like, but you can no longer plead ignorance if you (...) (20 years ago, 9-Nov-04, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | |