Wind god

James Wynn · 05 Nov 2010, 20:31 · from 2010-November.txt.gz

This is the message as the crawl holds it, before anything here touched it. What the conversation shows has been through ingest: transfer encodings decoded, attachments dropped, quote markers repaired, and the archiver’s ? resolved into quotation marks and dashes. Those repairs are judgements and some of them are wrong, which is what this page is for. Email addresses are obscured here as they are everywhere else on the site, so it is before our repairs rather than byte for byte.

From: crushtv at gmail.com (James Wynn)
Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2010 15:31:59 -0500
Subject: (urth) Wind god
In-Reply-To: <4CD46651.8020107 at gmail.com>
References: <SNT123-W1A8203753DA49C7A4C19FCF4C0 at phx.gbl>	<1c7a7817449d26dbf9f66f408d6dd2bd.squirrel at webmail.prismnet.com>	<4CD448C1.8030002 at gmail.com>	<4CD44DB5.20103 at gmail.com>	<4CD4590B.5030104 at gmail.com>	<4CD461F2.5040004 at gmail.com>
	<4CD46651.8020107 at gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4CD469BF.7080409 at gmail.com>

> Ant?nio Pedro Marques-
> Everyone's entitled to their opinions. Not to their facts. If the word
> 'green' isn't there, it isn't there, and repeatedly discussing why it 
> *is*
> there is inconsiderate. 

Only a aspergers-debilitated geek would be interested in policing what 
is a "fact" from what is an alternate reading from what is an error 
based on another posters erroneous reading popularly bandied about. It's 
fine to correct someone on the facts when you think you have noted an 
error. But if you go the step further and ascribe malicious motives or 
categorize the person's perceived error as "this is what you always do", 
I'm going to read you as a jerk.

u+16b9

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.urth.net/pipermail/urth-urth.net/attachments/20101105/a8431c04/attachment.htm>

An unofficial mirror of a public mailing list · about & removal requests · download the archive · before the list · original archive at urth.net