Re: Firefox - no more to follow? [was RISC OS in Action &c]
- From: Tim Hill <tim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 18:19:13 +0100
In article <HTI8g.75471$H71.65083@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Peter
Naulls <peter@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
John Cartmell wrote:
In article <a36762254e.peter@xxxxxxxxxx>, Peter NaullsAnd not deliberately snip sentences in half to take out important parts
<peter@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I long ago delivered on my promises regarding Firefox (unless you[snipped rest]
want to argue RISC OS 3.7 support). Any new version is not
something I will discuss here
Agreed. Anyone wanting to discuss future versions of Firefox should
use a new subject heading.
and change the meaning. I said I would not discuss it with you - this
very reason is plenty of justification for that.
This long-time usenet reader is confused as it is customary to snip on
usenet and the snipper admitted to the extent of the snipping.
Of what PN wrote which remains unsnipped: has the meaning of that been
changed? Some meaning has been completely removed from the original
entire message but that does not seem to change the meaning of what's
left. "Any new version is not something I will discuss here" is
unambiguous on its own (.) and the sentence was split at a conjunction.
Surely, JC has every right to remove references to a personal matter and
not respond to it - or anything else - in a public forum. I, for one, am
glad he didn't. This is not the place for such things. There are other
places to wash the RISC OS laundry, this exchange being an apt
demonstration of why this outlet is unsuitable. In times of dispute it is
customary to involve a third party when direct attempts at resolution
fail, rather than running around the playground telling everyone about it.
If PN's messages are to remain unsnipped perhaps he should keep them
entirely appropriate for public consumption and add 'please do not snip'
in a sig or somesuch. My User-agent reacts correctly to a click on the
"In article" reference and indeed, does threading stuff too. I am able to
read pre-snipped messages if I wish; less easily sometimes if some
posters have their software configured not to show the "In article"
reference. :-/
Perhaps it would have been pertinent for PN to ask whether the omission
of ";-)" from <4e256473e8john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> was a deliberate
goading, and then rise above it. Then again, I would have hoped an
erstwhile magazine publisher would have 'risen above it' long ago.
As is customary, please snip any reply to this message without altering
meaning. ;-)
T
--
* Cheap phone bills? Gift shopping? www.timil.com/usenet.php
* Spam-proof Usenet address? Visit www.invalid.org.uk
or email me: postmaster at invalid dot org dot uk
* (tim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx is deleted unread - please use my valid address above)
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Re: RISC OS in Action at Wakefield Show 2006
- From: John Cartmell
- Firefox - no more to follow? [was RISC OS in Action &c]
- From: John Cartmell
- Re: Firefox - no more to follow? [was RISC OS in Action &c]
- From: Peter Naulls
- Re: RISC OS in Action at Wakefield Show 2006
- Prev by Date: Fake Acorn
- Next by Date: Re: Where are my postings going ?
- Previous by thread: Re: Firefox - no more to follow? [was RISC OS in Action &c]
- Next by thread: Re: Firefox - no more to follow? [was RISC OS in Action &c]
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
