re: [gutvol-d] here's that alice pdf
joey said:
I was *very* clear about who my email was addressed to, and what the content of the email was.
so was i.
Your assumption that my reply had anything to do with your concept of round-tripping files isn't my problem.
i made no such "assumption" that your reply had anything to do with my concept. indeed, i was intentionally pointing out that it did not. so both of us now agree that what you said had nothing to do with what i was talking about. it was a good piece of information for the people to whom it is relevant, so i'm glad you shared it. i just remarked it had nothing to do with roundtripping, so casual readers would have the message reinforced that clean text, per se, was not my important point... now, how often do we want to keep repeating all this? -bowerbird
On Wed, Sep 28, 2005 at 11:01:48PM -0400, Bowerbird@aol.com wrote:
i made no such "assumption" that your reply had anything to do with my concept.
I'm must have been mistaken. I thought it was you who said:
but "clean text" is _not_ the main achievement here.
You stated that I "f[e]ll into [a] trap". This implies that: 1) You "set a trap" and were waiting for someone to "spring" it so that you could engage in yet another attempt to publically insult and humiliate someone and 2) That you believe my email bore some sort of relationship to your discussion of your dubious "achievements". It did not. I fell into no traps. I simply used the context of a discussion you had started to provide some useful information to those who might be seeking it.
now, how often do we want to keep repeating all this?
That's a good question. How long do you intend to try and use this thread as way to insult me?
participants (2)
-
Bowerbird＠aol.com -
joey