The point you seem to miss is that when you BEGIN by attacking people as
"trolls" you set the tone for the entire rest of your e-mail. The fact
is that the volume of mail that goes through this list is huge, and most
of us are very happy to find a reason to reduce the amount that we need
to read. Most of the people here are unlikely to have any background in
the problem that you have. It may be perfectly valid, but we have no
desire to step into the middle of a pissing match. By using the
expression "rigged by trolls" as you have, you are just inviting us into
that pissing match.
Ec
cu clt wrote:
If you can so readily trust a committee and substitute
your judgments with
theirs, you might be able save much much more troubles. Powerful lobbies
push their case in every election (be it RfA or Arbcom election). Blnguyen
has been the lamest addition.
On 6/25/07, Ray Saintonge <saintonge(a)telus.net> wrote:
>cu clt wrote:
>
>
>>I think you have missed serious things. Arbcom case seems to have been
>>rigged by trolls.
>>
>>
>Thank you for saying that so early in your e-mail. It saves me the
>trouble of trying to make sense of the rest.
>