Hi Mike,

THanks for the reply...

>>I'm just responding as others are going to respond to you and if this bothers you, well, I'm really sorry but this is life man.
>
>It doesn't bother me, why would you think it does?

Well, I was the one who made the remark about this recent virus situation ruining the person's life and how they might conclude that death was better than the alternative. (Remember - I do not think this way but was surmising that this individual will so think.)

Short answer: Your responses made me think that that you were 'bugged'.

>
>>If you'd still like to defend this person's actions (I doubt you really do) then go for it ... I'd be very interested in your thought processes here.
>
>My thought process is basically: "Here's a one-sided conversation, lets be the underdog." And I still don't believe the perpetrator should get a punishment harsher than one would for murder. Though, its not really interesting anymore, so I'll move on :-)

Well, murdering someone is certainly cause for the death penalty Mike. Perhaps you do not "feel" that this should be the case but for some 6,000 years of recorded history it sure has been, in varying degrees.

>
>>At least have the courtesy, if you really did want me to see this by CC'ing me, to talk to me directly, ok?
>
>I'm not sure what you mean, it was either CC a reply to you to Dave as well, or the other way around. I wanted you to see the message because (I read it quickly so I could be wrong) you said something about people thinking I wrote the virus if I defend them.

Well, perhaps we got our wires crossed. I had just sent you a couple messages directly and hadn't received a response.

No harm, no foul.

Best,

DD