Why isn't Rev more popular?
jperryl at ecs.fullerton.edu
Tue Dec 6 01:33:44 EST 2005
Because, Chipp was wrong to have replied to the list rather than to you
personally. And he apologized.
Presumably (because you haven't stated otherwise), you KNEW that you were
defaming to the list... and did so anyway.
I still don't see your morally superior point.
On Tue, 6 Dec 2005, Jerry Saperstein wrote:
> Perhaps you can explain why an apology is required by a person
> defending themselves agains defamation? Whatever Chipp's intent was with
> regard to whom he sent his posting, there can be no doubt of his intention
> to defame. What precisely am I to apologize for?
> As I've previously pointed out, those without an argument generally
> resort to ad hominem. Thank you for proving my point.
More information about the Use-livecode