"well written, cogent and on-topic" ... "reasoned rebuttal"
You keep on using those words. I don't think they mean what you think they do. Some data points: o " A lot of extra power, like it or not (I have a feeling you quite like it, though)." o "you are being hotheaded, impulsive, antagonising, and immature." o "in what possible universe" o "Frankly, it wouldn’t be appropriate for a greeter at Walmart" So if the above warrants what you consider well-written, cogent, on-topic and reasoned, then I fear that any further discussion is really worthless. o+o > On Nov 6, 2016, at 11:24 AM, Benedict Elliott Smith <bened...@apache.org> > wrote: > > Jim, > > I would love it if you could take the time to explain how arrived at a > diagnosis of trolling. > > Aleksey made a well written, cogent and on-topic criticism of your ongoing > behaviour, as well as a reasoned rebuttal of your absurd claim that your > power is inherent to you, not your position (I don't think many people know > who you are, only what you are). > > It was explicitly the topic of discussion, and there is mounting evidence of > your misbehaviour. This is the very definition of discussion, not trolling. > > Much like your "chess" comment, this appears to be an attempt to shut down > substantive discussion of your unsuitability for the role of board member. >
