Katharine Thayer (kthayer@pacifier.com)
Tue, 26 Jan 1999 08:00:58 +0000
Judy Seigel wrote:
>
> On Mon, 25 Jan 1999, Katharine Thayer wrote:
> > And what are you suggesting, that because you don't agree with [Phil
> > Davis] on gum, that we shouldn't believe anything
> he said
> > about color separations? Give me a break.
> >
> > The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.
>
> That's not at all what I said. The point is of course a minor one, but
> what is not minor is that once more you put words in my mouth as a pretext
> for sneers and insults. Now these attacks,
It wasn't intended as an attack, it was a question. Perhaps not well
put, and perhaps a bit prickly, but it was just a question, and I
thought it was a legitimate question. Apparently it came across
differently.
Since you've decided to have a henfight right on the list: from my side,
it seems that you are the one who is always trying to get a rise out of
me, (and obviously sometimes you succeed) and that the tension between
us started not when you sent me a copy of Post-Factory last summer, but
when I finally got around to reading it this summer and wrote you (not
on the list, but privately) to tell you where I thought the information
was incorrect, especially some of the digital information.
No, I don't want a war on the list, I've said that before. It's the last
thing I want. But every time I express my opinion here, I seem to be
drawn into one, whether I want it or not. Private mail to me suggests
that I'm not the only one this happens to, that many have left the list
for this reason, and that many have appreciated my contributions to the
list. It really is a lot more trouble than it's worth, however.
Katharine Thayer
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sat Nov 06 1999 - 10:06:44