> >>It seems a bit daft. > >>AFAICS, this is based on some perverse, distorted version of the MVC > >>paradigm. > >>Anyway, that's what Tim Colson wants, and it's nutty enough > >>that neither
> An ad hominem attack is necessarily on another person's > character, not on their ideas. Agreed. And by saying that my request was "daft" and based on "some perverse, distorted..." which I took to implies and insinuate that I have those qualities of character in order to create such an idea. That is offensive to me. > When I said that your idea seemed 'a bit daft' or > 'nutty' and explained why I thought this, that was not an ad > hominem attack. This insults and offends me even more! Please, do not tell me what my opinion is on the matter of being offended! I know quite well that and I am offended. > > The speciulation is incorrect, and the attacks are > > offensive. > Could you please outline what is incorrect about it? The speculation that this idea was based on some "perverse, distorted MVC paradigm" was incorrect. Despite needing no defense, I previously outlined in faily simple language that this question about how one might modify the velocity engine to limit comparisons to booleans was academic and based on the modus operandi of another template language I use in PERL called HTML::Template. There is no need for reply unless it contains apologies for offending me (yet again) and wasting my time repeating myself explaining rationale that should not have required any explanation in the first place. -Tim --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
