From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Feb 24 18:43:08 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E736516A4CE; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 18:43:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.pcnet.com (mail.pcnet.com [204.213.232.4]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77D0B43D1D; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 18:43:08 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from eischen@vigrid.com) Received: from mail.pcnet.com (mail.pcnet.com [204.213.232.4]) by mail.pcnet.com (8.12.10/8.12.1) with ESMTP id i1P2h7DF005540; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 21:43:07 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 21:43:07 -0500 (EST) From: Daniel Eischen X-Sender: eischen@pcnet5.pcnet.com To: Brad Knowles In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ENOUGH! [Re: Nontrivial brokeness with new threads.] X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 02:43:09 -0000 On Wed, 25 Feb 2004, Brad Knowles wrote: > At 4:41 PM -0700 2004/02/24, Scott Long wrote: > > > Please be more respectful to people asking these kinds of questions. > > The problem here is that Daniel's initial response to David's > question was fine, but David's reply was snide and > passive-aggressive. Daniel responding in kind is not unexpected. I didn't think I was being snide or disrepectful in my reply :-) Sometimes not putting in smileys makes all the difference! > David should have fully read the threads that he was referring to, > and not been so flippant in the first place. -- Dan Eischen