In a message dated 5/21/2008 11:50:16 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, morven@gmail.com writes:
As I suspected, the normal rule to follow when someone won't give specifics about a situation applies here too - the specifics hurt the writer's case and by leaving them out they hope to be more persuasive.
WJhonson, you don't do your argument any favors by doing this. All it does is make people suspect that there's more to the story - which in fact turned out to be the case.>>
----------
I never said there wasn't more to the story. I did not, and do not, know the entire backstory of Eleemosynary's actions. I was reacting solely and simply to the one issue raised by FT2, not to anything else, which is not relevant as FT2 has stated clearly what his issue was with Eleemosynary.
The story has a very long pedigree in-wiki. I wasn't trying to address the entire story, but one microscopic point in the long story.
Will Johnson
**************Get trade secrets for amazing burgers. Watch "Cooking with Tyler Florence" on AOL Food. (http://food.aol.com/tyler-florence?video=4&?NCID=aolfod00030000000002)
On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 12:32 PM, WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
The story has a very long pedigree in-wiki. I wasn't trying to address the entire story, but one microscopic point in the long story.
The problem is, though, that shorn of the context the only answers you're going to get are general ones. The general answer that most of us gave is that insisting on posting someone's real name when they've asked people not to do it is uncivil and disruptive unless there is good reason for it.
The specifics of this instance seem to indicate that Eleemosynary was being deliberately uncivil and disruptive by doing so and it was part of a general pattern of such behavior.
-Matt