[email protected]

Whoever this miserable nameless coward is who emailed me last night
commenting on who I should or should not converse with on this
newsgroup, please be advised I will do whatever I like, and I will do
it with my real name in the header too.

--

Peter Grange

Peter Grange wrote:

Whoever this miserable nameless coward is who emailed me last night
commenting on who I should or should not converse with on this
newsgroup, please be advised I will do whatever I like, and I will do
it with my real name in the header too.

Well said.

This sort of thing has been reported here before, once or twice.

"Peter Grange" wrote in message
news
Whoever this miserable nameless coward is who emailed me last night
commenting on who I should or should not converse with on this
newsgroup, please be advised I will do whatever I like, and I will do
it with my real name in the header too.


Same here - I was e-mailed at work.


--
Simon Mason
http://www.simonmason.karoo.net/

On Sun, 29 Mar 2009 12:45:22 +0100, "Simon Mason"
said in
:

Same here - I was e-mailed at work.

I have been emailed by the same person in the past. They were
polite, which is more than can be said of the trolls.

Guy
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/urc

"To every complex problem there is a solution which is
simple, neat and wrong" - HL Mencken

Contents packed by intellectual weight and may settle
after posting. May contain traces of irony.

Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
On Sun, 29 Mar 2009 12:45:22 +0100, "Simon Mason"
said in
:

Same here - I was e-mailed at work.

I have been emailed by the same person in the past. They were
polite, which is more than can be said of the trolls.

Guy
You wrote to *yourself*? What on earth for?

On Sun, 29 Mar 2009 12:53:02 +0100, "Just zis Guy, you know?"
wrote:

On Sun, 29 Mar 2009 12:45:22 +0100, "Simon Mason"
said in
:

Same here - I was e-mailed at work.

I have been emailed by the same person in the past. They were
polite, which is more than can be said of the trolls.


I was less than polite in my email response.

Here we are complaining about the threat of nameless bureaucrats
telling us we should wear helmets, and someone who posts (or at least
lurks) here is namelessly telling me who I should or should not talk
to.

If there had been a name on the email I might just have been polite,
but someone who is not prepared to reveal their name doesn't qualify
for politeness. I might start applying that to the posts here too ;-)

On 29 Mar, 12:59, _ wrote:
Just zis Guy, you know? wrote: On Sun, 29 Mar 2009 12:45:22 +0100, "Simon Mason"
said in
:

Same here - I was e-mailed at work.

I have been emailed by the same person in the past. *They were
polite, which is more than can be said of the trolls.

Guy

You wrote to *yourself*? What on earth for?

Of course it could never be one of the usual pair playing a game. They
are already actors, so they could doubtless manage polite.

On Sun, 29 Mar 2009 10:43:01 +0100, Peter Grange
wrote:

Whoever this miserable nameless coward is who emailed me last night
commenting on who I should or should not converse with on this
newsgroup, please be advised I will do whatever I like, and I will do
it with my real name in the header too.

I've had two of those emails: polite but opinionated.

The last thing I want to happen is some decent regulars to be
alienated from this group as happened to my friend Trevor Panther.

But I said this about Matt B, whose diatribe now seems sane in
comparison, "care in the community" is the best way to care for those
with mental illness.

Tom Crispin wrote:
On Sun, 29 Mar 2009 10:43:01 +0100, Peter Grange
wrote:

Whoever this miserable nameless coward is who emailed me last night
commenting on who I should or should not converse with on this
newsgroup, please be advised I will do whatever I like, and I will do
it with my real name in the header too.

I've had two of those emails: polite but opinionated.
I'm feeling a bit ignored! :-(

On Sun, 29 Mar 2009 10:43:01 +0100, Peter Grange
wrote:

Whoever this miserable nameless coward is who emailed me last night
commenting on who I should or should not converse with on this
newsgroup, please be advised I will do whatever I like, and I will do
it with my real name in the header too.



Well said Peter - I know that we have disagreed strongly - but I
really do admire your statement above.

Well done - you are a man with a spine.

Note that it is the norm to get about six of them - you are not the
first to be told by private e-mail what you may and may not do in urc.