On Nov 29, 2007 8:54 PM, Guy Chapman aka JzG <guy.chapman(a)spamcop.net> wrote:
Oh, right, so you were arguing from ignorance.
I'll let you off
then. Please, next time, feel free to ask rather than making a fool
of yourself, I'd happily provide diffs to spare your blushes.
You have a lot of dadburn nerve, after all of the insinuations you've
made that I/Dan had something to do with this. We of course had
nothing to do with that particular case, and I'm sure you knew it all
along-- else you would have had one or the other of us blocked. Well,
I suppose you can start counting Alec M. as part of the "small group",
but since you accept that I had nothing to do with it, the implication
is that we aren't acting as a group, but only as like-minded
individuals.
I see nothing to be embarrassed about-- nothing for ME to be
embarrassed about, anyway. You accept that I didn't participate, and
the implication is therefore that it doesn't take me to keep these
things going. And in this case it didn't take Dan T. either. Maybe if
you drive Alec M. away you can see these erasures through without
opposition, but then again, maybe someone else will rise up and
object. The thing is, I'm not chasing around looking for erasures to
"ZOMG! BADSITES!" at. But it would appear that some of the
pro-BADSITES crowd are, considering how quickly they managed to arrive
on the scene. Perhaps it is they who watch WR for pointers to the
crime scenes.
Somehow it doesn't seem right to ridicule me for supposedly seeking
out these problems, and then ridicule me for NOT seeking them out.