Subject:
|
Re: Can we help?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Sun, 7 Nov 2004 15:26:12 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
236 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Richie Dulin wrote:
> Do you consider the part where I used almost your exact words in response to
> your post the part which is mocking?
It is part of the mocking in that post, yes.
> If so, how was your post not a mock in the
> first place?
I don't view it that way. Not all sarcasm is mocking.
> Although I note that you haven't acknowledged
> that you failed to correctly set the FUT on your original reprimand to me.
I don't feel the original FUT was wrong. Admonitions (which my post was,
although poorly structured) belong in the original group (or, better, privately
via email, but I note that you ignored my email the last time that you were
mocking and I noticed it, so I didn't try that first as it had a record of
failing) unless there is a meta question as to their validity.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Can we help?
|
| (...) 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 didn’t 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)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Can we help?
|
| (...) -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)
|
16 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
