Subject:
|
Re: peeron inventory
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 3 Apr 2007 18:04:06 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
3803 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Timothy Gould wrote:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Patterson wrote:
>
> --snip--
>
> > Thanks Dave:
> >
> > Thanks Dave:
> >
> > I treat others well. If anything is rude it is the people that take apart every
> > comment I make, which I really do not give a hoot about. The inventories are
> > messed up; I am trying to fix that. Almost every one I look at needs work. I
> > would just expect the effort to fix to be the same as the effort to put the
> > inventory on in the first place.
> > Now as about comments; many more things were written that were nasty to me. I
> > had one nut case send me a picture to my email. I have also had several emails
> > thanking me for making corrections to sets that they had. They seemed amazed at
> > the blatant mistakes in the inventories that they relied on. At this point I
> > was saying that you cannot rely on the peeron inventories and I think that I
> > have proved that. I have made no attacks on anyone on this web site. I think
> > that the umbrage comes from the fact I am finding so many mistakes in the iconic
> > peeron inventories. Instead of attacking me Davy why don't you spend your time
> > as a volunteer and help peeron get the facts straight.
> > My last posts were changes, commenting on how quickly they get things done. You
> > have called me coming across as condescending, insulting, and rude. The only
> > comment I have made about peeron is that they are slow. A bit of a difference.
> > As to how I feel about people saying things about me: I have faced gun fire in
> > Iraq during Desert Storm, stood on the Sinai and watched Arab troops lobbing
> > motors our way, and spent a year in Viet Nam watching out for hidden taps,
> > explosions and average Vietnamese people shooting us. What ever a bunch of
> > people playing with plastic toys (which includes me) say won't hurt my feelings.
> > You seem to be far too thin skinned. If this is arrogant so be it. You seem to
> > be arrogant too. And you are probably the knucklehead that sent me the picture.
> > John P
>
> John,
>
> You're really beginning to make me very irritated. You seem unable to accept
> responsibility for the way you put things and seem to justify this in a variety
> of ways including your service record.
>
> You make many claims to attention to detail, correctness and your care for these
> things and yet you clearly demonstrate that you are not in one crucial detail:
> interactions with other people. Maybe in the army and your job this worked out
> for you, you are now dealing with the real world. You do NOT, as you claim,
> treat people very well. You treat people very poorly.
>
> Perhaps you have some trouble grasping the subtleties of the real word. As such
> I'm going to help you out by spelling some things out for you in a list:
> 1) Peeron is run by volunteers
> 2) Those volunteers have a finite amount of time
> 3) Those volunteers choose how to spend that time
> 4) You are being rude to those volunteers.
> 5) Being rude to those volunteers is unlikely to make them choose to spend their
> time on your corrections
>
> From here on you have no excuse for being rude. It cannot be put any clearer why
> your actions are out of order. I realise I'm going to get some long-winded,
> pointless response to this listing the same reasons you've been giving all along
> as to why you should act the way you act but frankly I don't care. I doubt it
> will say anything new and will just continue to show quite how bad you are at
> grasping a basic concept.
>
> There is second way you might be able to speed things up in addition to learning
> how to be polite. You could spend some of the 60hrs you are spending on these
> corrections on learning how to submit them more easily to Peeron. If you choose
> not to do this then I will be convinced that you don't really want to help
> Peeron, you just want to annoy people.
>
> Anyway, I really don't think I can get any more blunt to you without breaching
> the TOS of Lugnet so I'll leave it there.
>
> Tim
Tim:
I was not rude to volunteers, I even offered to volunteer to get thing done.
I want to help and have only come here when Dan ignored my requests as to what
was happening to the corrections sent into Peeron.com.
I am still not sure what polite is on this site. I am serious about this. What
exactly was not polite? Not in my last reply to Mad Dave, but in my posts to
Dan or the corrections? I just don't understand, sorry. I might be blunt and
don't mince words, but what was not polite? I am really serious about this
question.
The last comment I made was:
Corrections sent to inv@peeron again are not getting posted. It has been a bit
since they did a few. And again I am finding a lot of mistakes in the
inventories. I still stick by the 95% figure. By posting changes needed or at
least noted in the inventory here you all can see the problem with the
inventories. I would suggest if you need an inventory be suspect of any that
say they were done from the instructions (again I have not gotten to the smaller
sets, most of what I have been doing for the last 6 months were larger sets and
buckets.)
Is it wrong to say they are not getting posted? Is it not polite to say don't
go by these inventories that are done by instructions? I am finding a lot of
mistakes, is that impolite?
What in the above is wrong? Dan wrote to me after that and I answered. This is
the one that started everything all over again.
Dan wrote:"your demands and accusations” in the above there are no accusations
and I did not demand anything. There is a difference between demand and
pointing something out.
I would just like to know what I said that is so nasty in the above post.
Not only that I am getting rather tired of you all being spring loaded to the
pissed off position. "Don't kill the messenger" Isn't it better to know that
they are incorrect rather than assuming they are correct regardless of how it is
said?
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: peeron inventory
|
| (...) --snip-- (...) John, It was not polite to make the comment "Corrections sent to inv@peeron again are not getting posted. It has been a bit since they did a few.". The reason it isn't polite is because it is a) unneccesary and b) expectant as (...) (17 years ago, 3-Apr-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: peeron inventory
|
| (...) Actually, although it was impolite to call me "Mad Dave", I was very amused at the title. Perhaps you've confused the myriad of Dave's involved, or perhaps you have this vision of me where I'm shouting at the top of my lungs or something. (...) (17 years ago, 3-Apr-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: peeron inventory
|
| In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Patterson wrote: --snip-- (...) John, You're really beginning to make me very irritated. You seem unable to accept responsibility for the way you put things and seem to justify this in a variety of ways including (...) (17 years ago, 3-Apr-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
22 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
|
|
|
|
