XXX heeft geschreven:
 > The nefarious top-poster YYY wrote:
 >> On or about 5/27/2002 ..., ZZZ allegedly wrote:
 >>> YYY wrote:
 >>>> On or about 5/27/2002 ..., AAA allegedly wrote:
 >>>>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, YYY wrote:
 >>>>>> Because I'm a control freaq and it just bugs me. No reasonable

I can understand that developers get a bit weary of some
threads in this Mozilla group.
   Paul Berendsen (nefarios sub-top-poster).


Christopher Jahn heeft geschreven:
> The nefarious top-poster Steve Smith wrote:
> 
>> On or about 5/27/2002 18:47, having not taken the 5th, Bob Dietz 
>> allegedly wrote:
>>
>>> Steve Smith wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On or about 5/27/2002 15:16, having not taken the 5th, michael lefevre
>>>> allegedly wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Steve Smith wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Because I'm a control freaq and it just bugs me. No reasonable 
>>>>>> reason, just personal quirks.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> in which case, i'm afraid the exact answer to your original 
>>>>> question is
>>>>> "no, there isn't a pref for setting a different From: address"
>>>>>
>>>>
>  >>> My reasons are not relevant; and you should not be making
>  >>> judgments. I am not a spammer and don't care to be considered >>> one.
> 
>>>
>>> He asked you, why you wished to avoid having a dummy account.
>>> (Perhaps he thought he might be able to help with a work around
>>> or a different slant if he knew why.)
>>>
>>> You said, 'no reason.'
>>>
>>> He replied, no. No solution to the problem as stated.
>>>
>>> Where do you get that he is making judgments or calling
>>> you a spammer???
>>>
>>> Bob Dietz
>>>
>>
>> You'll have to back up to my first message to see the context. I 
>> pretty much generally find it offense to ask "How?", and then, before 
>> someone will answer the question, they want to answer "How?" with 
>> "Why?". In doing that they are judging, not responding. I have gotten 
>> that previous employers on occassion, usually those that don't 
>> understand that not only is /their/ time money, but mine is as well. 
>> That's not a consideration here, but it should help place my 
>> irritation in context.
>>
> 
> 
> First of all, I was the one who asked "why", and not anyone else.
> Bob is attributing two statements to one person, which is confusing the 
> issue.
> 
> When I asked "why?", I was attempting to get an accurate depiction of 
> the problem; making dummy accounts is an easy and obvious solution, and 
> I was trying to see if there is some reason to avoid this solution that 
> I was not aware of.
> 
> YOur initial response to this question was "No reason".
> 
> Michael then responded that there was no adjustment, to which you 
> suddenly go off on a childish tantrum about judgement and spamming that 
> makes no sense given that all he did was answer your question.
> 
> Instead of throwing childish and unprovoked tantrums, you should read 
> Steve GEver's post, in which he discusses the users_prefs you need to 
> change.
> 
> And while asking "why" may or may not be rationally considered 
> judgemental, Michael didn't deserve the response you gave, and you owe 
> him an apology.
> 
> 
> 


Reply via email to