tim.kearsley_at_milton-keynes.gov.uk wrote:
>
> DA Morgan wrote:
>
>>tim.kearsley_at_milton-keynes.gov.uk wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Daniel, you've gone right off the point, deliberately I think, because
>>>once again you have posted a misleading answer earlier in the thread
>>>and are now trying to deflect the thread away from that. You would
>>>make a good politician as they never answer a question put to them and
>>>go off at a tangent making irrelevant points.
>>
>>I'm off the point? Lets try this using Google as the arbiter of "the
>>point."
>>
>>Sybrand Bakker
>>COPY is a dead ally, as it is going to be desupported.
>>
>>Tim Kearsley
>>Indeed it is. But so what?
>>
>>Sybrand Bakker
>>It will prevent him to upgrade, wouldn't it?
>>Apparently you don't care about upgrades.
>>
>>And that really is the entire point. You were attempting to defend
>>functionality that you acknowledged was going to be desupported.
>>Now you make reference to it in the 10.1 docs which is a complete
>>reversal from your previous statement when you agreed with Sybrand.
>>
>>When you have dealt with the above ... I will consider extending the
>>discussion to some other matter.
>>--
>>Daniel A. Morgan
>>http://www.psoug.org
>>damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
>>(replace x with u to respond)
>
>
> Daniel, you show a quite astonishing ability to refuse to answer
> simple, direct questions.
>
> Tim Kearsley
> HBS Milton Keynes
I'm not refusing. I just want a straight forward accounting of the issue
I was resonding to before we change to the fact that I think persons
displaying your attitude do not make the best employees.
But please do keep in mind that we are in different countries, with
different cultures, and speak different langauges ;-), so perhaps what
you say is valid where you are: It isn't here.
--
Daniel A. Morgan
http://www.psoug.org
damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
(replace x with u to respond)
Received on Mon May 30 2005 - 17:05:50 CDT
