| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Eric Joslin writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
> > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Eric Joslin writes:
>
> > > Beleive it or not, I've never posted anything anywhere on Lugnet that I • would
> > > consider to be a flame.
> >
> > It is not what you consider to be a flame which is important - do you • agree?
>
> In all seriousness, I don't understand your question, mostly because if it • were
> communicated verbally, there would have been emphasis on one word or
another
to
> give me a clue what you meant.
>
> I'll assume what you meant is: "It's not what *you*
*You* must find it *really* hard to read books if there are *no* pointers to
the *important* words in the sentences? Perhaps *your* mother underlines
them
for *you*?
:-)
> consider to be a flame
> which is important", ie, other people's call on whether or not something • you
> wrote is a flame is what is really important, not your own opinion (that • seems
> to be the most likely interpretation of your question, given what I assume
> you're getting at- if it's wrong, please let me know).
>
> I have to disagree, sorry. I'm sure you
Who mentioned *me*?
> feel that I've flamed you at various
> points,
My skin is far to thick for that childishness. Prove a point to me
objectively, and I'll respect you. Otherwise you are just making noise.
> but the fact is, while I have disagree vehemently with some of your
> actions and statements, and have said so plainly (and in words that • probably
> got you all riled up), I have never made personal insults against you,
Forget about *me* for a moment. You have to remember that it is possible to
personally insult somebody without meaning it, or without meaning to cut
quite
so deep. As you don't really know your target, how do you know where the
line
is? That was what my *first* remark was all about Eric.
> I've
> never posted defamatory things about you *just* to upset you, and I've • always
> kept my comments confined to the actual disagreement at hand. To me, that
> spells exactly that- "disagreement", not "flaming".
>
> Trust me, were I to flame you, you'd instantly know the difference.
Such power at you finger tips.
Scott A
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: My point.
|
| (...) No, most writers can manage to get their point across clearly without the need for emphasis, because they know that the written word doesn't carry any. (...) You responded to my post, pretty much as I predicted you would. (...) You're right. (...) (24 years ago, 19-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: My point.
|
| (...) In all seriousness, I don't understand your question, mostly because if it were communicated verbally, there would have been emphasis on one word or another to give me a clue what you meant. I'll assume what you meant is: "It's not what *you* (...) (24 years ago, 19-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
29 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
|
|
|
|
