>pctech@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>>
>> Etiquette? What etiquette? The FIRST comment out of anyone's "mouth"
>> was "piss off". Where's the etequitte in that?
>
>That's really astonishing. I must have missed that mail, though I don't
>really filter mails. Who said that and where?
>
Piss off was in quotes because it was a paraphrase of the way the first response anyone made from the list came across.
>> Well then prove me wrong? Because that's all I've gotten at every
>> turn was nothing but flames. I tried to be helpful and offer
>> something to the community that I, obviously mistakenly, though muight
>> be useful and got a hearty "f*ck you" for my efforts. Where's the
>> "community spirit" in that?
>
>Oh right. Nobody offered you to host that document on wiki.centos.org. I
>must have dreamt that then.
That e-mail came FAR after people had already started flaming me.
>
>The first offensive mail came from you:
>
>| On Thu, 2006-08-03 at 15:18 -0600, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>| > On 8/3/06, pctech at mybellybutton.com <pctech at mybellybutton.com>
>| > wrote:
>| >> For those of you that either have an older revision of my firewall
>| >> document, or are otherwise keeping track of it, there is a new
>| >> version available. The current version of the document is version
>| >> 3.1. It's changed rather significantly in some areas.
>| >
>| > For those of us who have neither?
>|
>| Then there's no reason for you to fricken reply, is there?
>
>The second mail was an offer to you to host the document on
>wiki.centos.org by Jim Perrin. Which you responded to somewhat
>strangely.
>
>The third Mail was Karanbir Singh asking you:
>
>| and who are you ?
>| and what / where is your firewall doc ?
>
>Which is *short* and maybe misunderstandable, but not offensive at all.
>It was a question towards you because that was your first mail on the
>list (AFAICS) and noone on this list knew this document.
>
>Your answer to that was:
>
>| So far, two of the three replies, yours being one of them, have left me
>| with the impression that everyone in the CentOS community is the same as
>| the jerks in the forum were.
>
>So: Second offensive mail also came from you.
>
>You really *do* seem to have a perception problem.
>
>Ralph
>--
>Ralph Angenendt......ra@xxxxxxxxxxxx | .."Text processing has made it
>possible
>Bayerischer Rundfunk...80300 München | ....to right-justify any idea, even
>one
>Programmbereich.Bayern 3, Jugend und | .which cannot be justified on any
>other
>Multimedia.........Tl:089.5900.16023 | ..........grounds." -- J. Finnegan,
>USC
>
>_______________________________________________
>CentOS mailing list
>CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
>http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
