On Mon, 22 Nov 2004 16:32:04 GMT, Alex Chaihorsky wrote:

>> Sasha,
>>................
>> Nothing I wrote was an affront to your honor and required you to
>> respond. And if the emoticon didn't clue you into the fact that I was
>> teasing and not accusing, well, I guess there's a lesson in that for
>> me.
>
> I did not say that you were accusing and I did not say it was an affront to
> my honor. I said you were challenging.

Since you've decided to make this a confrontation, Sasha...

"I was implicitly accused of leaving the field of battle"

Was someone else posting from your account?


>> --
>> Derek
>>
>> Never argue with an idiot: they drag you down to their level, and then
>> they beat you with experience.
>
> You may also say that your sig (above) about "never argue with an idiot" is
> just a saying that has nothing to do with the subject since it is printed
> below your signature, etc. But in this context it is rude and it is
> camouflaged insult, regardless of where you put it and even if it has
> smileys or anything else attached (or not).

Actually, what I would say is that my .sig is randomly selected by my
newsreader from a large text file of different comments and
quotations.

There was nothing intentional or personal about it. It's not a
camouflaged insult. It's a random occurrence.

You are assuming confrontation and insult where none exists. Since my
..sig may have contributed to that, I apologize.

--
Derek

"So.....I was having dinner with world chess champion Garry Kasporov
and there was a checkered tablecloth. It took him two hours to pass me
the salt." -- Peter Kay