Re: [vox] word processing software (was: visio on linux)

[Micah Cowan <MAPSmicah@cowan.name>]

Rick Moen writes:
 > Quoting Micah Cowan (micah@cowan.name):
 > 
 > > Actually, it wasn't - check again, it was mine. (It does, in fact, say
 > > "Quoting Micah Cowan (micah@cowan.name)").
 > 
 > Allow me to refresh your memory:

<snipped irrelevant quote>

 > Now, if you have any posts of _yours_ that you desparately need me to
 > comment on, please let me know.  However, the comment I was responding
 > to was Mr. Wergedal's, immediately above.

I must admit it seems unwise to argue the color of the sky with
someone who apparently refuses to look up, but nobody ever said I was
wise anyway; so, here goes:

----
From: Micah Cowan <micah@cowan.name>
Sender: vox-admin@lists.lugod.org
To: vox@lists.lugod.org
Subject: Re: [vox] word processing software (was: visio on linux)
Date: Sat, 10 Aug 2002 13:45:05 -0700
Message-ID: <15701.31569.464591.558550@12-234-135-185.client.attbi.com>

Rick Moen writes:
 > Quoting Micah Cowan (micah@cowan.name):
 > 
 > > In the absence of hard facts, it is often acceptible to state one's
 > > belief or opinion, based on personal observations.
 > 
 > So, do you think "Linux is gaining ground in the server arena and not on
 > the desktop" sounds like someone's "belief or opinion", or an assertion of
 > fact?  I'm curious.

I believe the quote from me above rather implies the answer to your
question. "Belief or opinion", naturally. As you so lucidly pointed
out, who could back it up with facts?
----

(Note that your response clearly attributes the sentence to me, which
is correct)

To which you responded:

----
From: Rick Moen <rick@linuxmafia.com>
Sender: vox-admin@lists.lugod.org
To: vox@lists.lugod.org
Subject: Re: [vox] word processing software (was: visio on linux)
Date: Sat, 10 Aug 2002 13:56:09 -0700

Quoting Micah Cowan (micah@cowan.name):

> I believe the quote from me above rather implies the answer to your
> question.

This is more than a little confusing, I'm afraid -- since the quotation
discussed was from Mr. Andy Wergedal, not you.
----

You had no remaining quotes from Andy Wergedal in the post I have
listed first above. In what way is your sentence above correct, then?

 > > Perhaps it's about time to use an old Rick Moen standby when others
 > > have asked similar from you - "I'm not your research service".
 > 
 > Oh, I am _so_ very disappointed.
 > 
 > > Are you really claiming you don't know anybody who blindly applies a
 > > tool to a problem for which there are clearly better tools around?
 > 
 > I can't help noticing that you seem to want to change the subject, all
 > of a sudden.  It's a pity:  As an easily-confused techie, I was hoping
 > to be enlightened, and head off those sudden bouts of cynicism about
 > people hurling empty rhetoric that I've fallen victim to, of late.

A change of subject from what? The subject was my assertion that many
people apparently follow the creed, "One Right Tool for all jobs". It
looks *quite* on-subject to me.

I can't help noticing that you seem to want to pretend the subject is
something that changes as it suits you. A tactic you have used more
than once. It is indeed a pity.

I think this thread is over. You're welcome to continue it off-list,
if you must, though that is no guarantee of response.

-Micah
_______________________________________________
vox mailing list
vox@lists.lugod.org
http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox