Daniel's comments

[Daniel van Eijmeren]

SIGVALD GROSFJELD to me, 10-08-2003:

>> And *again* you mix up Barks with Rosa, in your controversial 
>> attempts to connect your logic with reality.

> I just stated an opinion of mine, nothing more, nothing less. 
> To indicate that that statement was an opinion *not* some kind 
> of fact I added IMO (means: In My Opinion).

Carl Barks was born in 1920 (IMO). In 1964, he submitted a story to 
Western Publishing (IMO), to get a job as comic book artist (IMO). 
The story was rejected (IMO) and so Barks decided to become a cowboy 
(IMO) instead, and he and his horse lived happily ever after (IMO)
in the Sahara, south-west of Australia (IMO).

I just stated an opinion of mine, nothing more, nothing less. 

>> Sigvald, I must admit that I'm getting tired of these kind of 
>> contributions from you.

> If you don't like to read other peoples opinions here then you 
> have a problem, you see this is actually a place in where people 
> is intended to state their opinions, whatever those may be.

No, most certainly *not* "whatever those may be".

Basically, you're just stating that you can do what you want, as 
long as you decide it's an opinion. And if people don't like it, 
they have a problem. Are you out of apologies, and is this your 
next strategy?

>> Notice that this is the THIRD chance you're destroying in your 
>> attempts to have "friendly" conversations on this mailing list.

> No. This time most of the quarrelling has occurred because some 
> people takes my statements to the extreme.

Your statements *are* extreme.

> My opinion is much more balanced than most people realizes. For 
> instance I was insulted just because I used the word "cult". 

It wasn't just the word "cult". There were many other words. And 
notice that I was complaining about *another* subject you were 
involved in, not the wicca one.

>> Doing so, you're also destroying the atmosphere on this mailing list.

> I may not be THE, or at least not THE ONLY problem in this list (see 
> above to see what I mean).

Well, I'm glad that you see that you may at least be ONE problem.

>> I thought you cared about this mailing list

> I do, Daniel, I really do!

Then, behave that way.

> Furthermore I think that much of the current problems are caused 
> by the current heated atmosphere here. Small sparks from me seems 
> to easily causing unwanted flame wars. In a friendlier atmosphere
> such misunderstandings would be figured out and solved way before 
> they could end up in flame wars.

You sound so sweet when you put it this way, so innocent. The heated 
atmosphere is mainly caused by your on-going bombing on this mailing 
list.

> Hopefully this thread can be ended peacefully before it also ends up 
> in a flame war.

Do I sound peacefully? I really don't care how it will end, Sigvald. 
I'm way past that point. I just want to have this on-going problem 
solved. That's my concern.

--- Daniël