Karl,<br><br>I just spent the last 5 minutes deciding if I should pipe up or if you're going to attack me next. However, I guess that at least some of the list agrees with me here by saying you're completely out of order. Andy has put his opinion across in a polite way and has just ducked out of the argument, but you couldn't leave it? You had to personally insult him and possibly a group of others?<br>
<br>Whether he's wrong or not why do you feel the need to insult people? I feel it completely degrades the tone and legitimacy of the list.<br><br>Don't feel that you need to respond - I don't intend on responding further in this matter unless I have anything significant to add.<br>
<br>Karl<br><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">2008/6/10 Karl Lattimer <<a href="mailto:karl@qdh.org.uk">karl@qdh.org.uk</a>>:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="Ih2E3d">On Tue, 2008-06-10 at 02:12 +0000, Andy Smith wrote:<br>
> Hi Karl,<br>
><br>
> On Sat, Jun 07, 2008 at 10:46:44AM +0300, Karl Lattimer wrote:<br>
> ><br>
> > > The context of this thread is Karl claiming that the Eee PC is<br>
> > > specialist hardware that requires a customised OS.<br>
> ><br>
> > Bullshit!<br>
><br>
> You appear to have snipped away your own words from earlier:<br>
><br>
> > >>>Karl Lattimer wrote:<br>
> > >>>>However, I'd say this, for highly customised OS's on<br>
> > >>>>specialist hardware like eeepc its just right.<br>
><br>
> > The context of this thread is whether or not Linux is gaining a foothold<br>
> > through specialised hardware devices, with custom OS's which meet<br>
> > consumer specific needs.<br>
><br>
> Sure, but then Martin pointed out how the Eee is not very<br>
> specialised and no x86 OS requires any real customising to work on<br>
> it, which is what I am agreeing with and you are not.<br>
<br>
</div>Andy did you answer the n800 analogy?<br>
<br>
No? You're a fucking idiot!, end of. You're continuing to be<br>
argumentative.<br>
<br>
Just because I make a simple statement which I and others consider to be<br>
truthful, does not mean you should divert the discussion into attack<br>
mode.<br>
<br>
My original email had other very valid points for discussion, which were<br>
ignored as Martin saw fit to attack me on minor points.<br>
<div class="Ih2E3d"><br>
> > If you want to take this as a further opportunity to attempt to lambast<br>
> > me and my thoughts then you truly are a small minded fool.<br>
><br>
> ...or alternatively yes, it could be a plot by all these<br>
> small-minded fools to lambast you and your thoughts. :-)<br>
<br>
</div>Never considered you're plotting or conspiring, just that a select few<br>
of you are a bunch of dickheads who would argue black was white.<br>
<div><div></div><div class="Wj3C7c"><br>
BR,<br>
K,<br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Kent mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Kent@mailman.lug.org.uk">Kent@mailman.lug.org.uk</a><br>
<a href="https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/kent" target="_blank">https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/kent</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>