> So, basically, you want to re-fight the old flamewar. Gotcha.
> .
>
> I suspect that you're disagreeing with my claim that it is not
> necessarily ethical to use bugs. I, personally, think that it is not
> ethical to do so. Someone will probably now write a 100-page flame
> about my past behavior. I think my past behavior was unethical. So
> flaming me about it is a waste of everyone's time, but I'm sure it
> will happen anyway, just as the letter I'm replying to flamed me about
> it.
>
It should be noted that my intial email on this topic was sent to the list,
and not to Greg. It did not refer to Greg at all and only mentioned Oleg in
the context of saying that Lotc, Rimmon, Plato/Oleg and others have used
bugs. (something Greg has admitted to so I don't see where my saying so
would be a "flame").
In my second email I referred directly to Greg only once, in the line "Ethics
in war? You sound like Clinton." If that's a flame it's a pretty mild one.
My email was not directed at Greg nor was a response to him. The instances
of "you" were a generic pronoun referring to all who constantly complain
about bugs to the list. It was about the mindless blather that occurs
whenever this topic is broached. The second one was a resonse to Greg's
email, because he responded point by point to mine. And was a further
attempt by me to address the mind-set behind the bug-complainers and not an
attempt to address Greg directly. I have learned my lesson about trying to
have a civilized conversation with Greg as I don't think he's capable of
either. (a conversation or being civilized) [for the record, that was a
flame]
To that end I will address Greg directly only once here.
Greg, chill.
You are the most paranoid person I've ever met. Nothing in my first email
was even directed at you, let alone could be construed as a flame of you. My
second email was merely a response to yours and didn't say anything negative
about you (except for the Clinton comment). I feel that my response to your
email was in the tone set by you. Your first email to me was rather
challenging so I returned in kind. Usually I wait until too late in one of
our "discussions" before making this point so I'm going to step up and do it
early while there are only 2 emails from each of us.
Look at my first email - which wasn't even about you,
and look at your response to it and see who set the tone for this
conversation. I did not flame you or even mention you. You are the one that
took it upon himself to respond to my post, point-by-point, in a rather
haughty manner. It is you Greg who have set this tone as you do in most of
your posts. I won't play your game anymore.
Eric