@Scott Bennett

[Ansgar Wiechers]

On 2009-07-01 Scott Bennett wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Jul 2009 16:06:52 +0200 Ansgar Wiechers wrote:
>> On 2009-07-01 Scott Bennett wrote:
>>>      Once again your presumption is mistaken.  I had indeed read that
>>> gloriously opaque stretch of text, though it has been a while since I
>>> last suffered through it.
>>>      In any case, I did not refer to that document, as your latest
>                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>> remark above tacitly admits, but rather to the generally accepted
>   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>> practice that had been discovered decades ago to be what worked most
>>> satisfactorily by the participants of countless mailing lists.
>> 
>> RFC 1855 === standard netiquette
>> 
>> Like it or not.
>> 
>>> Perhaps this is a language issue.
>> 
>> Or perhaps the issue is that the netiquette just doesn't state what
>> you said it would.
> 
> You know, I've answered you truthfully several times now.

Look, it's actually really simple. RFC 1855 summarizes what is commonly
referred to as "the netiquette". Either you're referring to the
netiquette, then you're automatically implicitly referring to RFC 1855,
or you're not referring to the netiquette in the first place. Your
reluctance to accept the fact doesn't change anything about it.

> Your reaction has been to imply that I've lied to you.  As far as I'm
> concerned, that ends the conversation and probably renders pointless
> any further conversations between us on any topic.

Not holding my breath.

Regards
Ansgar Wiechers
-- 
"The Mac OS X kernel should never panic because, when it does, it
seriously inconveniences the user."
--http://developer.apple.com/technotes/tn2004/tn2118.html