>>>>Sorry, Peter, but no "break" was needed. She expected everyone else to know about it because she knows about it????
>>>>My bet - she has yet to ask MichelF to fix it.
>>>>
>>>
>>>I wanted to demonstrate it to you, but you missed what I was actually trying to tell you. This is exactly my problem - inability to convey the message the way I see it.
>>
>>Naomi, I understood your message exactly as you wanted it to be understood. Perhaps it's an inability - or unwillingness - on the side of Jim in this case?!
>
>No, Peter, I told her that I don't care. And then she admitted that she uses it when she hs a suspicion.
>
>You are far far far far far too "picky" in your readings. For you, if it wasn't written, there's no possibility of your assuming correctly.
You jump in, sneer at Naomi and then, when politely asked by her to investigate, you say you don't care? Having a bad day Jim? Again, give her a break.
Groet,
Peter de Valença
Constructive frustration is the breeding ground of genius.
If there’s no willingness to moderate for the sake of good debate, then I have no willingness to debate at all.
Let's develop superb standards that will end the holy wars.
"There are three types of people: Alphas and Betas", said the beta decisively.
If you find this message rude or offensive or stupid, please take a step away from the keyboard and try to think calmly about an eventual a possible alternative explanation of my message.
