<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote">On 9 May 2013 05:44, Felix Miata <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:mrmazda@earthlink.net" target="_blank">mrmazda@earthlink.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
On 2013-05-09 00:02 (GMT-0400) Adam Williamson composed:<div class="im"><br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
On Wed, 2013-05-08 at 22:36 -0400, Felix Miata wrote:<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
On 2013-05-08 10:09 (GMT+0200) Pierre-Yves Chibon composed:<br>
</blockquote></blockquote>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
> you are replying to a 4 days old email on a thread that is no<br>
> longer active?<br>
</blockquote></blockquote>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
A: The thread was started on a Friday night.<br>
</blockquote></blockquote>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
B: Some people don't get to read mail every day, or more than a few or less<br>
times a week.<br>
</blockquote></blockquote>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
A + B = perfectly justified timing of reply.<br>
</blockquote></blockquote>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
C: the debate was taken to every place it could possibly go, and the<br>
commit was reverted.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
So what's the point of reviving it? Sometimes, if you don't get your<br>
$0.02 posted in time, it's best to just sit on it.<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
So everyone who cannot maintain currency has to catch up 100% prior to writing a response coming to mind while reading, lest he be publicly chastised by temporal relevance police? Likely "revival" was not the primary objective of the late writer. The late arrival would much better have been left ignored than have the already too long thread be further extended by OT police commentary.<div class="im HOEnZb">
<br><br></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>There is something of a difference between coming in late with a relevant and previously unconsidered point and coming in late to snipe. <br></div></div><br>-- <br>imalone<br>
<a href="http://ibmalone.blogspot.co.uk" target="_blank">http://ibmalone.blogspot.co.uk</a>
</div></div>