On 29 Mar 2008, at 20:39, Michael Schmarck wrote:
> Stroller <stroller <at> stellar.eclipse.co.uk> writes:
>
>> I, too, thought about saying something like this at the time. I'm
>> glad you have done so and I agree with all your points.
>
> I don't. I disagree with his most important point...

Yes, but you're demonstrating yourself to be a clueless idiot.

>> Alan's reply was harmless. You're not entitled to pick on him unless
>> you posted correctly in the first place.
>
> So, I *am* entitled. Thanks!

No, you're not.

>> You're asking for help - provide as much information as possible and
>> please don't antagonise people (especially because they may be able
>> to help you!).
>
> Now, please go back and read Alans first post in the thread. It
> absolutely did not sound, as if he even wanted to help.

That doesn't matter. Please don't antagonise people, full-stop.

>> I, too, know what it's like to receive a reply to one of my questions
>> which I find to be unhelpful and aggravating. However, "two wrongs
>> don't make a right" and no-one benefits from an angry response.
>
> Oh, so it's now my fault for responding to a flamebait? Nice. It's
> not the aggressor who's doing something wrong?

It was NOT flamebait. It was HARMLESS.

Grown up!

Stroller.
--
gentoo-user@(protected)