On Feb 4, 1:24 pm, Balázs Galambosi <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 5:47 PM, Rey Bango <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Please, let's focus on technical discussions here and stop with the
> > posting to links that only spark up non-productive debates and add no
> > value to JSMentors..
>
> You mean stick to the everlasting flow of questions about jQuery this,
> and jQuery that? Besides, on jsmentors.com under goals it says: "Via
> the JSMentors mailing list you can: [...] Review your article on
> JavaScript topic". I agree that the article has nothing new to say,
> but Dmitry's post is awesome and has VALUE (even if you missed it).
> It's not your list, it's a community list, used by people with
> different intrests (in regards to Javascript of course).
>
> People are different. Please consider that. Thank you!
>
> On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 4:52 PM, jemptymethod <[email protected]> wrote:
> > I consider this spam
>
> Intelligent people didn't use to reply to spam. There are probably
> more than 100+ ways to delete/leave a thread. Use one.

And the trollish insinuation behind your remark is that I am not
intelligent.  But if you "read between the lines" you'd realize I'm
trying to open a discussion as to whether these posts are spam.  So we
agree on that, yet you still have to insinuate I'm not intelligent?
How do you know I did not also do something such as click "report as
spam" within Google groups.

Between the spam and your (yes, you) trolling JSMentors risks
devolving into the noise-to-signal festival that is
comp.lang.javascript

George Jempty

-- 
To view archived discussions from the original JSMentors Mailman list: 
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/

To search via a non-Google archive, visit here: 
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]

Reply via email to