From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22665 invoked by alias); 12 Mar 2011 17:16:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 22656 invoked by uid 22791); 12 Mar 2011 17:16:36 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from simon.codemeta.com (HELO simon.codemeta.com) (199.125.75.14) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sat, 12 Mar 2011 17:16:28 +0000 Received: from [192.168.1.101] (c-66-31-207-108.hsd1.nh.comcast.net [66.31.207.108]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by simon.codemeta.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D60E708CE for ; Sat, 12 Mar 2011 12:16:23 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <4D7BAA3C.6090502@veritech.com> Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2011 17:16:00 -0000 From: "Lee D. Rothstein" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9.2.15) Gecko/20110303 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: The Vulgar and Unprofessional Cygwin-Talk List Subject: Re: snapshots revisited References: <20110310080923.19244yp07upxphcz@messagerie.si.c-s.fr> <20110310091353.GU12899@calimero.vinschen.de> <20110310232423.GA3588@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <20110310232514.GA10198@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <20110311082012.GE7064@calimero.vinschen.de> <20110311152511.GB4645@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <0105D5C1E0353146B1B222348B0411A209DAA1007F@NIHMLBX02.nih.gov> In-Reply-To: <0105D5C1E0353146B1B222348B0411A209DAA1007F@NIHMLBX02.nih.gov> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact cygwin-talk-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-talk-owner@cygwin.com Reply-To: The Vulgar and Unprofessional Cygwin-Talk List Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-talk@cygwin.com X-SW-Source: 2011-q1/txt/msg00025.txt.bz2 On 3/11/2011 11:27 PM, Buchbinder, Barry (NIH/NIAID) [E] wrote: > David Eisner sent the following at Friday, March 11, 2011 11:13 AM >> Here's my theory. Chris was making a snarky comment > I don't know about anyone else, but I'll share how Chris's "style" > affects me. > > I don't want to be the target of his (or anyone else's) ire. > Therefore, before hitting send, I carefully and critically review > my email to make sure that it is polite, respectful, unpresumptuous, > and thankful. That is something that everyone should do anyway, but > Chris adds an incentive. > > Think about it. Every request is wrapped around a complaint. > "Please pass the water." ("Why are you keeping the water over > there where I can't @#$%^ get it!") So when people make an > effort to avoid triggering a reaction from Chris, the overall > tone of the list improves. And when they don't, they shouldn't > complain about something that could have easily been avoided. > > (However, I admit that appreciation of Chris's style is an acquired > taste.) > >> Corrina is polite to list members in general, which is >> appreciated.) > Look at it this way. Averaging Corinna's constant politeness with > Chris's curmudgeonliness yields a pleasant ambiance. > > And if reading some snarky retorts is the price one pays for getting > free help with a great product (also free), we still are getting a > bargain. If one wants support provided by Corinna and not Chris, I > suspect that arrangements can be made with Red Hat. :-) > > - Barry > Disclaimer: Statements made herein are not made on behalf of NIAID Thank you for saying everything you said, exactly the way you said it, and oh yes: Amen! (Moreover, my own "performance" is likely chastened by this gentle reminder. ;-|) Nonetheless, Barry is to be chastised for failing to live up to the low standards of the title of this mail list. ;-) Lee