Daniel: new site

[Daniel van Eijmeren]

HARRY FLUKS to me, 5 FEBRUARY 2001:

>> Unless I missed an attack to you on the site, I also don't understand
>> why you felt attacked. Please explain.

> Kenneth already said that these fights were "annoying". Why do you
> continue this subject?

I am just replying to your messages, trying to understand what you mean.
We have both contributed (or wasted) exactly the same amount of emails
to this discussion, so I don't see any reason why you try to put the
blame on me. 

> BTW, I suspect Kenneth is much younger than I thought at first. An
> opening message "Hi, I'm Kenneth, I'm from x and I'm y years old"
> would have helped in that case.

Maybe not being so agressive about his contribution also would have
helped? I don't see why you keep on putting the blame on someone else
for your anger. 

> It is no more than polite to write messages in such a way that most
> of the people can read them without too much extra effort. If a
> message is clearly written without that intent, I (as one of the
> readers) indeed feel insulted. I don't consider this mailing list
> a chat box.

You didn't know who exactly you were replying to. So, what you did was
attacking intentions as you *thought* they were - without mentioning
those intentions you were thinking of. That made the anger in your
message rather unclear (at least to me), so that's why I asked you
about it.


Best wishes,

--- Daniel