On 22/05/06, Eugene Zelenko eugene.zelenko@gmail.com wrote: ...
I think one person could not speak for all community. You have valid points, but why do you dismiss the same right for other people?
Now and again, you want to discuss not the proposals but the person making the proposals (me). Please, re-read carefully what I've written in message you are replying to. I've just retold my proposals in Be: and gist of your replies. Did I omit something relevant? Did I mis-represent the facts?
Now, for that passage:
As far as I remember, Kiryl and you had a conflict in the past. This explains a lot.
I've never known the guy, however, he foul-mouthed me in maillists several times, with no provocation on my side, AFAIR. So what's that "lot" this supposedly explains and how is it related with my message at all? My remark on my belief was just a remark, I should put it in P.S. properly.
I think good idea to discuss this first on be:, not behind the backs of be: contributors.
I've done my bit of discussing in Be: already, to no avail. And I'm not under any obligation to continue "discussing" there indefinitely, too. Now I'm taking the issue to where I believe it would be handled more efficiently, if at all.
-regards