On 11/26/2010 01:11 PM, Dag Wieers wrote: >> I suggest you read it again, because your 'which basicly means' is >> incorrect. > As you stated yourself, you are being pedantic. And I think you are > deliberately making this thread more worse than it should be. Being pedantic does not imply I am wrong. Your basis for the argument is flawed, and the lengths you are going to in order to circumvent that issue is odd. > Explain to me how sending two mails to find users to test, is "repeated > spamming" ? And while you know better, you can't resist the urge to > disinform. So you dont think its worth sticking with the same policy for you as it does for everyone else ? I'm not disinforming about anything but clearing out the crazy FUD you are trying to create here. > I do think the problem is the content, as much as you don't like me > mentioning we have alternative kmod-drbd packages (that actualy get > updated frequently), you don't like others to discuss transparancy wrt. > the build process or alternatives. FUD... You clearly don't get it, why not stop trying and stop giving yourself all the grief ? > Well, this is the Internet, get used to it. I am also fairly sure that the 'internet' does not imply freedom to do as you want, when you want, where you want - and suite yourself in anyway you like with no response from anyone. Its the 'where' bit that you need to go think about a bit. - KB