I am not OK with any of it, and after Mr. Johnson, I suspect the list is
not as well.
I'd just like it to be kept civil, and limited to real exchanges of
technical issues.
I hope you all realize that you can take this off the forum and discuss
amongst yourselves.
But let's try and keep this civil and professional.
Please?
Doug Fuerst
------ Original Message ------
From "Jon Perryman" <[email protected]>
To [email protected]
Date 10/31/2023 19:06:25 PM
Subject Re: SCHEDIRB Jon Perryman is correct re-linked as AC=1 no ABEND
ON SVC 8
On Tue, 31 Oct 2023 21:53:36 +0000, Doug Fuerst <[email protected]> wrote:
Did we just trade Bill Johnson for Jon Perryman? Are you two related? We
are back to backbiting and insults.
Can we just stop?
If I'm showing a pattern of being confused or being constantly wrong (as
claimed by Crayford), please show me where. So you are ok with Crayford
intentionally insulting me but my finally getting fed up with him puts me into
the Bill Johnson classification?
My last response was not intended to be insulting. If it was, I apologize. I
greatly respect Peter's insights but this was the perfect example for Crayford
that demonstrated take the high road In this case, there was no benefit in
pursuing an obscure situation that others will never see. It was better to
ignore it and allow others to think I was wrong.
The last response was driven by Crayford responding with "confused again" after
I showed how wrong and confused he was on his last 3 responses to my comments. What has
emboldened Crayford to be insulting? It certainly is not based on his real knowledge.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
