Dean Kent (dkent@realworldtech.com) on 12/2/05 wrote:
---------------------------
>Bill Todd (billtodd@metrocast.net) on 12/1/05 wrote:
>---------------------------
>
>>
>>Horseshit. You *inferred* this, but it was not implied.
>
>Yes, it was. In fact, it wasn't even disguised very well. No matter how cleverly
>you (and Armand) try to deny it. I simply asked why this was never asked regarding AMD - for a specific reason.
>
>See the spinmeisters work!!!! ;-).

Even if it is probably safe to say that nobody expected retractions and apologies, you don't seem to realize that you are replying to a message that is showing, in a fact-based and relatively civil way, that you have been paying more attention to your inner voices than to what was actually going on around you. Once more.

As this behavior led to baseless accusations and name-calling, it seems disastrous to react by some more empty ad-hominems and ignore the factual rebuttal, as you just did.

What you are getting now is basically free coaching. I humbly suggest you try and make the best of it.

- Armand