Great Circle Associates List-Managers
(November 1999)
 

Indexed By Date: [Previous] [Next] Indexed By Thread: [Previous] [Next]

Subject: Re: What is list-managers? (was Re: AOL dropping mail
From: Nick Simicich <njs @ scifi . squawk . com>
Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 02:14:28 -0500
To: Chuq Von Rospach <chuqui @ plaidworks . com>
Cc: Chuq Von Rospach <chuqui @ plaidworks . com>, <List-Managers @ GreatCircle . COM>
In-reply-to: <v04210107b45f5cf8f495@plaidworks.com>
References: <3.0.5.32.19991122154218.03598e80@127.0.0.1><3.0.5.32.19991122103459.033aa630@127.0.0.1><NCBBIFDBOJMGBJABJOHGOECNCDAA.tneff@bigfoot.com><NCBBIFDBOJMGBJABJOHGOECNCDAA.tneff@bigfoot.com><3.0.5.32.19991122103459.033aa630@127.0.0.1><3.0.5.32.19991122154218.03598e80@127.0.0.1>

At 12:54 PM 11/22/99 -0800, Chuq Von Rospach wrote:
>At 3:42 PM -0500 11/22/99, Nick Simicich wrote:
>
>> And everything that does meet your standards is right?
>
>nope.
>
>> Chuq, other than this AOL thing, what is it you have said that I have
>> disagreed with that is so discouraging to you?
>
>well, the AOL thing is more than enough, but we've gone into it a few 
>times.

Twice?  Where I was involved, anyway.

> Rich and I tend to disagree a lot, but when you rip into me, 
>it always comes across as blindly negative and very personal.

Let's try this again, Chuq:

1.  You took it personal with your comments about it being amusing to watch
people discuss things that they couldn't possibly understand.  By the way,
I have worked on problems on that scale and participated in the design of
solutions that scaled to the needs.

2.  I posted an entire count of my postings to this list by topic.  Your
statement that I have attacked you repeatedly really has not a shred of
truth to it.  

Chuq, once again, I've posted my list of postings.  

Your repeatedly asserting this claim that you are under constant attack, by
me, anyway, does not raise it from the realm of Chuq's delusions to truth.

There have been two (2) exchanges on AOL, both prompted by the problems
that their irresponsible design causes list owners.

>> I've posted a fair bit on topica.
>
>Oh, yeah. That was one of the other ones where you did your best Eeyore.

I don't apologize for attacking spam or spammers.  If that makes me an
eeyore, I'll wear the label proudly.  Now, if you were on the other side of
the argument, well, you chose to be and you chose your company.

>>>If Ronald is the list troll, you're the list Eeyore.
>>
>> And you are the ancient wisdom of the list, the ultimate arbiter in all
>> matters?  I just want to get the titles right here so that I can show all
>> due respect.
>
>Didn't you listen to anything I said in my last post? Hell, no. 

I listed to everything you said, and read it more than once, trying to
figure out what you were saying.  Basically you were and still are throwing
a juvenile tantrum.  "I'll take my ball and bat and go home."

>that's not what I said. 

Read your postings again, oh mighty Chuq.

>If the lst prefers you and Ronald around, 
>well, I'll happily leave. But it ain't up to me. Or you. Or ronald. I 
>don't pretend it is.

Look, Chuq.  You want to leave the list, do so.  Throwing a tantrum as you
do so is infantile.  Are you trying to get the rest of the list to kick me
and/or Ronald off?  

>> The point is that I'm not lashing out at anything I see.
>
>Or that you don't recognize it as such.

Or that there is simply no evidence of me doing so because I haven't.  You
can't produce the postings because they simply are not there.  I relly went
over that list of postings to see if I might be wrong in my own impressions.

I've "lashed out" at AOL's stupid mail policies and at Topica's Spamming.
If there are only two things I can see, then I'm nearly blind.  But I've
been in many more than two discussions on this list.  Was I lashing out
during all of those?  I don't think so...

>> I am lashing out
>> at laughable ideas.
>
>Um, well. Oh, hell. Looking at what you just said, there's such a 
>disconnect in how things are viewed I won't waste electrons any 
>further. I don't for a second disbelieve you honestly feel that way, 
>and as such, I simply don't think it's worth wasting either of our 
>time looking for common ground to discuss this with. There is none.

Chuq, ignoring the last exchange, you have made statements of fact (not
opinion) about what has gone before which are simply not true.  I ask for a
public apology.  This is not looking for common ground, it is simply asking
for an accurate recounting of the past.  I don't care to have you apologize
for your perceptions of me or my actions, nor will I apologize to you for
mine.  But either admit that in Chuqbonics, twice is all the time and two
is everything, or apologize for getting it wrong.  And if you got the count
that wrong, maybe you need to rethink your perceptions.

--
The thing I like most about chat rooms is that people assume that you are
human.
Nick Simicich mailto:njs@scifi.squawk.com or (last choice)
mailto:njs@us.ibm.com
http://scifi.squawk.com/njs.html -- Stop by and Light Up The World!


Follow-Ups:
References:
Indexed By Date Previous: Re: Onelist.com allows forced subscriptions and spamming
From: Carrie Lybecker <carriejl@home.com>
Next: Re: What is list-managers? (was Re: AOL dropping mail
From: Nick Simicich <njs@scifi.squawk.com>
Indexed By Thread Previous: Re: What is list-managers? (was Re: AOL dropping mail
From: Chuq Von Rospach <chuqui@plaidworks.com>
Next: Re: What is list-managers? (was Re: AOL dropping mail
From: Tim Pierce <twp@rootsweb.com>

Google
 
Search Internet Search www.greatcircle.com