On 14 February 2013 19:31, Theo10011 <
de10011@gmail.com> wrote:
> If you read again, I questioned, denoted by a question mark - if achal
> *still* serves on their board and if there was still an association. I asked
> still, because I knew he did at one point and I don't follow either of them.
> What assertions? He *did* serve on their board, he just quit some time ago.
> I don't follow achal or CIS's internal structure.
"As far as I know achal still serves on your board?" or "Does Achal
still serve on your board?". Weasel wording will take you places.
Jeez!? You think that is weasel wording. Fine, let's say I assumed he was still on the board. Boy, was I wrong! It was the worst accusation ever! He should be here demanding an apology for that defamation himself. How dare I!
> You are getting awfully defensive here for achal, for asking a direct
> question if Achal was still on their board or not.
Oooh! Look! A red herring!
I'm getting awfully tired by your point, if you make it one of these days. I'm not sure if you defending achal's reputation by repeatedly pointing out that he quit the board or just chose a weak point to begin with. So, saying that you are getting defensive is a red herring now? I don't see you defending anyone else here....or anywhere.
-Theo