On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 11:50:14AM +0000, MJ Ray wrote: > On 2004-03-11 10:48:54 +0000 Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> > wrote: > >Trying to talk to people without referring to people directly makes > >things unnecessarily difficult. Avoiding making individuals the focus of a > >thread is both more obnoxious, and easier to avoid without causing problems. > Is it really significantly more obnoxious?
I certainly find Thomas' thread much more obnoxious than your use of the word "your" to single out the mail you were replying to. > At least it means you have > to concentrate on the topic and "play the ball, not the man", which > some have trouble with. Sure, but sometimes to do that you have to refer to specific instances as examples to get a grip on what you're talking about. Singling out individuals in that way certainly can cross the line into being needlessly offensive, but it certainly seems reasonable to do it occassionally. > >(And anyway, the "you" from my mail quoted above is an impersonal you, > >synonymous with "one", so isn't on point for your complaint.) > They're indistinguishable [...] Uh, no they're not. It's possible to mistake one for the other, sure, but that's a long way from indistinguishable. Too much hyperbole can be a bad thing too. Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/> I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. Linux.conf.au 2004 -- Because we could. http://conf.linux.org.au/ -- Jan 12-17, 2004
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature