An apology is required from me

[EGO2.1]

Well then I stand corrected! I once again apologize, and will keep mt 
"pop-ins" as minimal and brief as possible! Thank you for clearing this 
up for me! LoL!


EGO II


On 06/24/2012 03:02 AM, Daniel wrote:
> Eddie G.O'Connor Jr-I wrote:
>
>> 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.
>
> The issue wasn't whether a blanket statement would be accepted by all. 
>  The issue was whether you could make peace by telling a group of 
> disputants, amongst other things, that there was some sort of 
> legitimacy in one disputant having called another arrogant. (You 
> probably did not _intend_ to do that, but you managed to do it 
> none-the-less, as a consequence of not having actually followed what 
> was being said.)
>
>> 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.
>
> Again, you're writing as if there are just two sides here (so that 
> there are "opposites"); there are at least three distinct positions 
> her, and possibly more.
>
>> 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?
>
> You also write as if there are just two disputants; there have been 
> almost 40!  One-to-one works with two people, each only concerned with 
> the views of the other.  Otherwise, one uses something such as (tah 
> dah!) a mailing list.
>
>> I don't "pop in" on amy of the threads.....I follow the consistently,
>
> Attempting to follow and participating are two different things. You 
> indeed popped-in on a discussion, and it is plain that your prior 
> attempts to follow it had been unsuccessful.