Re: Enabling telnet, ftp, pop3 for root...

Sybren Stuvel wrote:

matt_left_coast enlightened us with:
I see you snipped the point where you attacked, why is that?

Because people have been able to read that which has been written.

Which it was and you admit it:

No
need for me to repeat it.

If it were not written, you could not repeat it. So you admit you attacked.


Making vauge statements like: "I didn't read everything you two
wrote to the letter, but I got the impression you had some flaws
too." is clearly attacking ME by saying I am FLAWED

I did not say you are flawed, I said I had the impression you had some
flaws.

Who cares what YOU think?

It's written in the previous tense (I make no statements about
your current situation) and I say it's my impression of your state,
not your state itself.

Ahhh, but why should anyone take YOU seriously?


You mis-read what I wrote. There's a specific flaw for you, if you
want to know so badly.

But that is AFTER your claim, thus it is NOT valid support for your claim.
Specially when you have claimed "It's written in the previous tense"!


Why can't you just answer the questions?

Because you've just showed you can't see the difference between an
impression of something, and that something. I'm done reasoning with
you.

The questions were asked BEFORE your claim that I can not see the
difference. You could not answere them THEN and now you are trying to BS
your way out of answering them NOW.


It is clear that you can not address the actual claims I have made
so you are attempting to discrete me with vague, unsupported,
undocumented claims. Why do you feel the need to use such tactics?

Because you thought I attacked you, where I didn't.

Yes, you did. You admitted it above when you claimed you did not need to
repeat it.


Sybren


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
    ... nor by escaping to meta-levels, ... No, kooks always complain when they aren't treated in the manner that serious researchers are, and the reason they aren't is because their claims fall apart at the meta-levels and include nothing that merits discussion at the base level. ... If I've already explained why I don't believe you, how does that FORCE you to repeat them and what makes you think repeating them is going to change my mind? ... Are you under the impression that you should have a free pass to write whatever nonsense you want and not have it called to your attention? ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: Advice: Amp building
    ... either repeat the experiment, or having identified any 'flaws', to design ... and carry out a different one of a 'better' design which tries to overcome ... raises more points than it answers, but this subject is incredibly complex, and 'put up or shut up' is not satisfactory for reasons I've touched on. ...
    (uk.rec.audio)
  • Re: A note on personal corruption as a result of using C
    ... admit there was no such post. ... So once again, you repeat a lie. ... That's what your friend Hitler did. ...
    (comp.programming)
  • Re: A note on personal corruption as a result of using C
    ... was posted, but nobody else saw. ... admit there was no such post. ... So once again, you repeat a lie. ...
    (comp.programming)
  • Re: DONT FEED THE TROLLS !!!
    ... I think it's his inability to admit to making a mistake that so irks ... he dismissed that and repeated his original assertion. ... He simply continued to repeat his original statement. ...
    (uk.rec.video.digital)