>
> > Dammit, I keep telling people I don't care how you classify it. Call it
> > a bug, call it an ethical hazard, I don't care. It ought to be changed.
> > There are reasons to change it, none to keep it the same. Whether you
>
> #1 reason *not* to change it: I might want to use this *feature*,
> especially until such time as I make snooping mail easier. Thanks for
> documenting it.
Ahh, but you will still have to change it for it to be useful. Now,
I've already said I don't expect everyone to change it. I've also
said that I expect some people will want to read other player's
mail and some won't. You see, we agree, it's just that some people
will not listen. They insist on using their own definitions and
meanings of my argument long after I have told them that they
aren't arguing against what I'm saying.
> > directed at you David, but I'm tired of the arrogant, I'm gonna win
> > this argument no matter what attitude of some of the list members.
>
> Oh puleeze... You have responded to each and every person to offer up an
> opinion on the matter, all of which I believe were contrary to your
> position and then repeatedly responded with the equivalent of "Yes it is!"
> Sorry, but this is abuse... arguments are down the hall and to the left.
Here's a perfect example of what I'm talking about. If it was ever
unclear what I meant in my first post when I said simply "If you
switch into another person you can read there mail" then I should
think my numerous postings would have corrected you. What's the
deal with this "contrary to my position" stuff? Who the hell do you
think knows my own position better than me? I originally meant that
the switch behavior is of no use to anyone and it needs changed. I
didn't forsee that people would use it for reading mail on purpose
because it's so woefully inadaquate that I would personally just
write my own command. However, it appears that some people have
modified their mud to make use of switch's abilitiy to read other
people's mail. I accept this as perfectly valid, but I still stand
by the fact that the behavior of stock circle switch doesn't cut it.
When you claim my position is different from what I've repeated
told you it is then you are just looking to pat yourself on the
back.
> > I've already said we basically agree except you wish to use different
> > terminology. There's nothing to fight about.
>
> Then knock it off.
>
> Ron - who said nothing useful in this message, but is betting that Andrew
> will find something to argue about in it.
+------------------------------------------------------------+
| Ensure that you have read the CircleMUD Mailing List FAQ: |
| http://democracy.queensu.ca/~fletcher/Circle/list-faq.html |
+------------------------------------------------------------+
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/08/00 PST