11-04-2003, 06:35 PM
First you chide me for "'Tis far nobler than criticizing a person's perspective on a fictional work without ever bothering to clearly point out what irks you about it."
So I repeat again in almost childish simplcity "what irks you about it". Appearently finnally you bother to read it. Since you were obviously wrong in that stament, you act like you were addressing a seperate point - "your continual and baffling stream of subtle insults, followed by a flat-out refusal to make account for your insulting remarks"
This is a sperate matter. And you are right about the "high horse" in this regard, I think those comments spoke for themselves.
If I were to elaborate more this would be percieved as an attack on your person rather than on your product.
My later comments derived only from your response however are indeed personal.
So I repeat again in almost childish simplcity "what irks you about it". Appearently finnally you bother to read it. Since you were obviously wrong in that stament, you act like you were addressing a seperate point - "your continual and baffling stream of subtle insults, followed by a flat-out refusal to make account for your insulting remarks"
This is a sperate matter. And you are right about the "high horse" in this regard, I think those comments spoke for themselves.
If I were to elaborate more this would be percieved as an attack on your person rather than on your product.
My later comments derived only from your response however are indeed personal.