Posted by Lou Pilder on February 28, 2003, at 8:34:39
In reply to Re: Please ignore my previous post - Lou, posted by Dinah on February 28, 2003, at 7:56:05
Dinah,
You wrote,[...Lou, if I do not respond, you should know I mean no direspect...].
Well, I would like you to know that {not responding}, is not in the list that I gave here that IMO, in general, would be [not OK]. To not respond is a {privilege},IMO, in general, granted by the 5th amendment to the U.S. Constitution. It is responses that write things like, [...I'm not going to respond to you {because I don't like your such and such...] that I consider to be.IMO. in general,to be [uncooperative or {less supportive}], [but not {uncivil}].
So I want you to know that I would not consider anyone here to be {disrespectfull} for not responding. It is just that some responses for requests for clarification or identification, could be , IMO, in general, to be{not OK}, but not unvivil, and thsat one could, perhaps, consider alternatives to posting [not OK] posts as defined by the administration here, not by me. I was only giving suggestions for improvement and asking for clarification from the admin. if they also could consider some , or all, or none , of my concerns about those type of replys to requests for clarification to be OK or not OK, or , perhaps, uncivil.
Best wishes,
Lou
poster:Lou Pilder
thread:204566
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20030221/msgs/204612.html