The UK Home Automation Archive

Archive Home
Group Home
Search Archive


Advanced Search

The UKHA-ARCHIVE IS CEASING OPERATIONS 31 DEC 2024

Latest message you have seen: RE: Bar Code scanner - [PLUG] alert


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: JRECEIVER DOCUMENTATION - Step 1 - Install a Java VM.


  • To: <ukha_d@xxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: JRECEIVER DOCUMENTATION - Step 1 - Install a Java VM.
  • From: "Gerard McGovern" <stuff@xxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 17:10:32 +0100
  • Delivered-to: ukha_archive@xxxxxxx
  • Delivered-to: mailing list ukha_d@xxxxxxx
  • Mailing-list: list ukha_d@xxxxxxx; contact ukha_d-owner@xxxxxxx
  • Reply-to: ukha_d@xxxxxxx

> >Now, can somebody please explain how we have got from there to
here?
> >Explanations that hinge on the fact you don't like Gerard because
of
> >previous arguments do not count. Sorry folks.
>
> Here's what happened, John.
>
> Gerard didn't mail Mark *DIRECTLY* pointing out the problem.
> He ripped the piss in a public forum, in a SARCASTIC manner.
>
> "Are you just TRYING to make these URLS not work", I mean,
> cmon? That's an alt.whiney.usenet post if ever I saw one.

!!!

Ian, you are 100% out of order. Actually, I can't believe you are so
naïve to misquote someone on a list that is archived. That is NOT what I
said. The exact quote was:

"Are you deliberately putting a backslash instead of regular slash on
those links so they don't work?"

That is asking a perfectly reasonable question and there is not a hint
of sarcasm in there. Mark then responded with a perfectly logical answer
and the matter was left at that. In fact, not that it is any of your
business Ian, but Mark and I have been pinging emails back and forth all
afternoon, all totally amicable.

> Worse, what he did was make something that is really not a
> problem IMO sufficiently "in mind" that others felt that
they
> should pass comment when Mark posted an entirely helpful document.

Oh god, now I'm responsible for other people's actions? This just gets
more unbelievable by the second.

All the other posters did was to point to Mark that *if* he was thinking
of publishing the URLs in a public document, he might want to change the
URLs. What is the big deal?

G





Home | Main Index | Thread Index

Comments to the Webmaster are always welcomed, please use this contact form . Note that as this site is a mailing list archive, the Webmaster has no control over the contents of the messages. Comments about message content should be directed to the relevant mailing list.