Dear Rose, I don't agree with anything you have written so far. I said someone, not "someone else". That "someone" included me and the historian Christine Nicholls. I already told you why I think Selma's book is well written and well researched. If you disagree then please tell me why. I also would like to know why you were so troubled by my positive impression of Selma's book so as to make sarcastic remarks directed at me. What have I done to you? I would also like to know who you are since you are new to Goanet.
Cheers, Santosh On Thursday, May 15, 2014 1:57 PM, Melvyn Fernandes <mel...@orange.net> wrote: Dear Santosh > >This is what you wrote (not someone else) in Message 9, Goanet Digest Vol 9, >Issue 286 on Monday 12 May 2014: > > >Quote >Selma's book is well-researched and well-written......... >Unquote > > >Just two days later on 14 May 2014, in Message 7, Goanet Digest, Vol 9, Issue >291 you wrote: > >Quote >But I only read a couple of chapters .. >Unquote > >My final response to you: >A classic State of Goan confusion. If you do not understand what you write, >there is absolutely no chance you will understand what I write, so if you >agree this matter is closed. > >Rose Fernandes >Thornton Heath, Surrey, United Kingdom > >15 May 2014 > >
