Excuse me, my mistake.
David Grove wrote:
> > If you have not been following this thread, then maybe that is
> > the reason for
> > the confused-sounding nature of your email.
> >
> > I would say Simon was the one "ignoring an issue and attacking a
> > person", not
> > Vijay. I think Vijay was
> > Well, I *have* been following the discussion. And to me, it looks indeed
> > like you, Simon, were indeed attacking ME on non-technical grounds.
> > Vijay just jumped in for him, like a lioness trying to protect her
> > kittens.
>
> Which he does from time to time, as do most of us, myself lik
> -Original Message-
> From: Bart Lateur [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2001 10:48 AM
> To: Perl 6 Language Mailing List
> Subject: Re: Social Reform
>
>
> On Tue, 12 Jun 2001 08:54:13 +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
>
> >On Mon, Jun 11, 2
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001 08:54:13 +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
>On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 05:19:26PM -0700, Daniel S. Wilkerson wrote:
>> I would say Simon was the one "ignoring an issue and attacking a person", not
>> Vijay.
>
>You are wrong. Go back through the archives. Vijay has posted four
>messages
> On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 05:19:26PM -0700, Daniel S. Wilkerson wrote:
> > I would say Simon was the one "ignoring an issue and attacking
> a person", not
> > Vijay.
>
> You are wrong. Go back through the archives. Vijay has posted four
> messages: two of which are critical of Perl, two of which a
> If you have not been following this thread, then maybe that is
> the reason for
> the confused-sounding nature of your email.
>
> I would say Simon was the one "ignoring an issue and attacking a
> person", not
> Vijay. I think Vijay was the one pointing out that this person ("Me") was
> contrib
On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 05:19:26PM -0700, Daniel S. Wilkerson wrote:
> I would say Simon was the one "ignoring an issue and attacking a person", not
> Vijay.
You are wrong. Go back through the archives. Vijay has posted four
messages: two of which are critical of Perl, two of which are pretty
he
If you have not been following this thread, then maybe that is the reason for
the confused-sounding nature of your email.
I would say Simon was the one "ignoring an issue and attacking a person", not
Vijay. I think Vijay was the one pointing out that this person ("Me") was
contributing to the di
