Print

Print


At 04:00 PM 3/1/00 -0500, Hugh wrote:
>Bob wrote:
>> ...
>
>>Don wrote:
>
Hugh deleted the relevant SUBSTANCE in what I wrote, in explaining
to Don:
>
>> That's the kind of substance that is EASY to start a flame war...

BUt there was no flamewar, because Don understood my explanation.

>
>True; a significant contributor is if a party is hypersensitive and/or
>looking for excuses to take offense at even the slightest transgression or
>innuendo.

Hypersensitive?  Read my reply to YOUR completely unwarranted
allegations about not supporting your items and calling me a
hypocrite when YOU were the one acting out your hypocrisy.
Posting reference cited below.

>
>[...snip...]
>
>
>> This dialogue is a PERFECT example of...
>
>A lack of brevity <g>.

Hugh's post is a PERFECT example of brevity to hide his own
hypocrisy and wrongs.   Note the ABSENCE of any smiley here.


I am referring to this post of my reply to Hugh:

>Date:         Mon, 28 Feb 2000 12:42:59 -0500
>Sender: Scuba diving discussion list <[log in to unmask]>
>From: "Reef Fish (Large Nassau Grouper)" <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject:      Re: LONG Reply to Don Ward (was Re: Comments on proposed
Guidelines)

in reply to Hugh's post which violated Scuba-L Guidelines in
posting form (in non-ASCII text which is unreadable in the
Digest form), violated his OWN guideline items, and made numerous
unsubstantiated and unwarranted allegations about me.


Good try, Hugh.

YOu've played this kind of trick too many times before.  If's
deja vu.  Most of it in DejaNEWS also!

-- Bob.