On Fri, 2005-11-18 at 19:09 -0700, Craig White wrote:
On Fri, 2005-11-18 at 20:29 -0500, Sam Drinkard wrote:
<snip>
I'd like to interject here.. this thread has really gone off the deep end, but just chew on this for a little while, and perhaps something good will come out of it. 99% of the time, people get agitated, aggrivated, or ill about things that 1., they have no control over, and 2., in all likelyhood, 99% of the time, those 99% of events will *NEVER* have any impact on you, *so* why even worry with it ? Personal feelings never solve anything unless you happen to be husband and wife, and I don't think any of you fit that category. It's time to move on to other topics, if this thread has not run everybody off already.
and I'd like to interject here...
I am quite certain that few if any minds are changed by these debates but I think that it's arbitrary and unfair for some to express their opinions and then someone decides that they can cut off debate because they aren't interested.
I presume you know how to delete emails that are on topics that you aren't interested in.
Everyone should get the opportunity to speak their piece - regardless of whether you agree or not, and if you're not interested in the thread...just delete it.
Craig
I could be wrong, but I took Sam's post as a suggestion. It seemed perfectly reasonable to me even though I've been interested in the thread because if I am patient and wade through the necessary repetition I get introduced to a lot of concepts and details that I've not been exposed to.
I did not see a threat (and actual apparent follow-through) to block or remove anyone, as we have seen in the past.
So I just wanted to say I think nothing was wrong with the *suggestion* made.
Bill