An apology is required from me

[Eddie G.O'Connor Jr-I]

On 06/23/2012 10:09 AM, Daniel wrote:
> On 06/23/2012 06:51 AM, Eddie G.O'Connor Jr-I wrote:
>
>>>> Wow.  The arrogance in that statement is rather astounding.
>>>
>>> Wow.  Your resort to personally attacking me is rather astounding, as
>>> also is your imputing arrogance to my making a point of pure logic.
>
> <snip>
>
>> Uhh....guys? not to be a pain in the arse or anything, but does it
>> matter either way? I have a slew of e-mails of you guys going back and
>> forth, let's just leave it as "You have YOUR opinion......and He has
>> HIS" which is something we're all entitled to, and should therefore
>> respect them. I believe you both have valid points made, and I KNOW
>> there are people who feel like either one of you do regarding Gnome, I
>> DON'T believe that going "back & forth" will help in any case.....but
>> its been entertaining to say the least!...LoL!
>
> Okay, now, go back and read the opinion that Mike Wohlgemuth actually
> expressed, which began with the claim that I'm astonishingly arrogant. 
>  Do you think that you're doing a particularly good job playing 
> peace-maker, when you insist that this is simply a matter of opinion 
> or that his opinion has a sound basis?
>
> Moreover, when you refer to a "both" and "either" here, it shows that
> you haven't been paying attention; there are more than two sorts of
> opinions being expressed.  Now, it's perfectly all right for you not
> to pay attention, but not if you're subsequently going to pop-in and
> express some blanket opinion about the merits of all sides.
>
> I suspect that you're best-off just ignoring this particular thread.

While I don't consider myself on the level of most of the people here, I 
also am not stupid enough to think my "blanket statement" will be 
wonderfully and miraculously accepted by all. I was more trying to point 
out that the same way you can send me a direct e-mail telling me....to 
put it bluntly.... "mind my business"...couldn't you do the same in 
regards to whomever it is you're at opposites with regarding opinion, 
lack of facts, inclusion of facts, whether or not points are valid, 
moot, frivolous, etc. I meant no harm in making the statements I made, 
and stand by them......seriously.......if you want to hash out the 
semantics of whom said what and in what order they were said, and what 
information was actually requested as opposed to what was 
"snipped".....omitted......spoken out of sequence etc. Then why not do 
it one-on-one? as opposed to attaching it to a thread in a mailing list? 
I don't "pop in" on amy of the threads.....I follow the consistently, 
because I'm turning my entire focus on becoming Linux Certified and 
every piece of information will help. Granted some of it might be so 
minuscule that it probably won't even merit mention, but as I've learned 
being a Windows LAN admin for some time, sometimes it's that one piece 
of information (the exact place to go to when you want to delete 
something that claims to be "un-deletable"......how to get info from an 
application that has frozen or hung........walking through a "forest" 
and checking the permissions and access rights of users in different 
domains, and trying to get them to sync...etc.) So I read these e-mails 
trying to hold on to every bit of info that seems relevant.....not to 
become a snobby know-it-all, but to be able to sift through mt mental 
"backlog" and find that ONE piece of info that'll help to save the 
day......I apologize if you thought I was doing anything other than 
that.....cheers!


EGO II


EGO II
>
>