I feel that the paragraph was presented out of this context. Moreover, it was very easy for readers to assume that the author of that one "crytical" paragraph was responsible for all of the various insults Gian referred to in his post. (Andrew Larsen, for one, made that false assumption in "Re: Sigh" V7 #415). For what it's worth, I have never called Gian Gero a "wanker" in private mail; nor have I ever told him that he "doesn't deserve to be a guru". These gems must have come from other correspondents. Further, I have never called Gian a "prat" in a public post -- or, at least, not in a post that *I* intended to make public.
Finally, I also believe that it is only polite to keep private correspondence private, and I will not therefore be sending choice excerpts from our other letters to the Digest, however tempting, amusing or self-exculpatory this might appear. I have, however, emailed Andrew Larsen privately with my response to the various other issues and misconceptions he raised in his post "Re: Sigh" V7#415.
I am delighted to see that Gian Gero has taken my advice (which he actively solicited) and is now once again participating on the Digest under his own name. Long may this continue.
:::: Email: <mailto:Nick_Brooke_at_btinternet.com>
Nick
:::: Website: <http://www.btinternet.com/~Nick_Brooke/>
Powered by hypermail