Re: [OPE-L] On flaming

From: ope-admin@ricardo.ecn.wfu.edu
Date: Sun Nov 26 2006 - 16:07:10 EST

• Next message: michael a. lebowitz: "Re: [OPE-L] *enforcing* the list rule against flaming"
• Previous message: Dogan Goecmen: "Re: [OPE-L] On flaming"
• In reply to: Dogan Goecmen: "Re: [OPE-L] On flaming"
• Next in thread: Riccardo Bellofiore: "Re: [OPE-L] On flaming"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

> As for your wish to see the conflict solved,  the answer is very
> simple: DON'T FLAME!  This is not the optimal  answer, however:
> public apologies to the person who has been flamed and to  the list
> would be a much better and just solution.
> You say here to me in plural "DON'T FLAME". Do you mean I have flamed
> anyone in the list or why are you using the plural imperative form.

Dogan:

No, I did not intend to imply that you had engaged in flaming, i.e.
personal abuse of other listmembers.  I used the plural because I was
addressing the list.

Thank you for your input.

In solidarity, Jerry

• Next message: michael a. lebowitz: "Re: [OPE-L] *enforcing* the list rule against flaming"
• Previous message: Dogan Goecmen: "Re: [OPE-L] On flaming"
• In reply to: Dogan Goecmen: "Re: [OPE-L] On flaming"
• Next in thread: Riccardo Bellofiore: "Re: [OPE-L] On flaming"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Nov 30 2006 - 00:00:06 EST