Re: To Upgrade or Not. What's the difference?

In article <1178965157.011419.42770@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ams
<ams@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
To John Cartmell - if someone raises an objection to a point you've made
answer it (please) if you can't do so in a logical manner and it's apparent
you're wrong *accept it* - we all make mistakes (trust me I know) and there
is nothing wrong with taking a correction from time to time. If you're
*right* provide proof don't obfuscate just be direct and to the point.

Clarifications or apologies are difficult to make when you know someone is
ready to pounce on every word you utter - and some words you don't!
If anyone thinks that what I've said is wrong - then by all means say so, and
I'm happy to receive such questions by e-mail if that's seen as the better
option. I have nothing to gain by making comments that are wrong, and
corrections made in a friendly way are very welcome. It's very easy for any of
us to forget where a thread has come from and get the wrong end of the stick!

I've recently said that I will not be responding to (and certainly not
initiating) personal attacks - so if anyone questions what I say then *all*
that they will get back is clarification or an apology for my error.

NB I do understand druck's annoyance at false claims being uncorrected - I
feel exactly the same with what I see as wrong.

I'm afraid I cannot do entirely as AMS asks: I frequently don't respond at all
to objections, even though I know the objection is ill-founded and can answer
it in full, because I know that doing so would cause argument. Where I can see
that there is value in an objection put fairly then I will try to ensure that
I acknowledge that rather than simply leaving it with no response. And yes you
do get an apology when I'm wrong! ;-)

--
John Cartmell john@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 0845 006 8822 or 0161 969 9820
Qercus magazine FAX +44 (0)8700-519-527 www.finnybank.com
Qercus - the best guide to RISC OS computing

.

Relevant Pages