Who hasn't been badly flamed?

[Gary R. Van Sickle]

> From: Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes
> Sent: Sunday, September 11, 2005 7:00 AM
> To: The Cygwin-Talk Malingering List
> Subject: Re: Who hasn't been badly flamed?
> 
> On Sat, Sep 10, 2005 at 04:35:36AM -0500, Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
> > Christopher Faylor wrote:
> > > Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
> 
> > > >Ok Chris, I'll ask you this yet again: Please point out 
> an instance 
> > > >of where I have "flamed" you, so that I may apologize, 
> and we can 
> > > >both put the terrible tragedy behind us.  Please again note that 
> > > >taking you to task for poor behavior (or even what you 
> would term 
> > > >"trolling") is not a "flame" by anybody's definition.
> 
> > > For the record, yes, I do think that you have flamed but I don't 
> > > require an apology.
>  
> > Again you misunderstand: it is *I* who have the requirement 
> here.  If 
> > I have "flamed" you as you claim I have, seems to me it's only fair 
> > that you give me the opportunity to apologize for it, no?
> 
> I have a recollection of your posting what could only be 
> termed flames,

I believe you are not recalling accurately.

> but have absolutely no desire to reread 
> through such dreck in the archives looking for a link to give 
> you.

Indeed.  Seems that there are a few people here that would rather baselessly
malign me than search the archives in vain and have to eat their words.

>  Especially since you seem unlikely to acknowlege it at such.
> 

Did you miss this part sir?:

"Please point out an instance of where I have "flamed" you, so that I may
apologize, and we can both put the terrible tragedy behind us."

If it's "flame", let's put it out.  If it ain't, let's stop the false
accusations, huh?

> Instead, I invite you to privately reread all your messages 
> criticising others and reflect upon them.

No, you're the one doing the accusing, it's your job to do the legwork.  If
indeed there are "all [these] messages criticising others" flowing from me,
it should surely be trivial to find just one example that's a "flame" in the
archives, should it not?

-- 
Gary R. Van Sickle