Well, this has got to be the definition of irony, right?


---- Rado S <list2rado at gmx.de> wrote: 
> =- Jeffrey Watts wrote on Fri 28.Mar'08 at  1:48:00 -0500 -=
> > Anyhow, I'm going against my better judgment to try to explain
> > this to you again.
> Funny that you mention this, those were exactly my thoughts, too. :)
> Bear with me a last time, then judge better. ;)
> > By responding to every sentence I wrote you kind of missed my point,
> > but I do appreciate that you feel the need to explain your views.
> It's useless (for me) to go this far and then let wrong impressions
> stay as last words. I'm not the bad guy despite opposing the main
> guy seen as "good". There isn't just black and white.
> > You see, this kind of "explaining your views" is your problem.
> > {...}
> > you need to make your point and move on. You do not move on. You
> > go quiet for a month or so, then post, post, post there it comes
> > again.
> If I wouldn't have had moved on, I wouldn't have stumbled over
> the meta-server issues to raise them, which were the origin of this
> activity. One query led to another. Besides, netrek decisions have
> changed over course of time, so there are chances other things
> change, too.
> No, "explaining" is not the problem. It helps understand and make
> people think.
>  Sometimes new insights pop up.
>  I learned something new about James (and other things), so I
> thought it could be combined with something else.
>  This time I just forgot a fact which would have stopped me from
> going the known wrong way again. I didn't recall until we clashed
> again about it.
> > Most of the developers that still respond to you are obviously not
> > taking you seriously at all, and your continued onslaught of
> > comments only serves to make it worse.
> I'm not blind, I'm aware of that. So obviously I'm not responding
> only for/ to them, as much as my original questions weren't limited
> to them. It's a pity the same few people responded the same way.
> (Is this really all that is left?)
>  While I said I'm sorry for them responding when they shouldn't,
> it's still up to them. If there is interest in learning, then
> follow through, otherwise don't even start.
> > I don't see you as a bad person, my personal opinion is that your
> > communication techniques are very flawed and backfire on you.
> I'm probably mistaken about the energy and diversity total that is
> left in netrek to find some likeminded folks.
> Anyway: you keep doubling the posts by using 2 addrs. Please use
> just @lists.netrek.org.
> -- 
> © Rado S. -- You must provide YOUR effort for your goal!
> EVERY effort counts: at least to show your attitude.
> You're responsible for ALL you do: you get what you give.
> _______________________________________________
> netrek-dev mailing list
> netrek-dev at us.netrek.org
> http://mailman.us.netrek.org/mailman/listinfo/netrek-dev