 |
 |
I actually didn't Tim, apologies for that. I just hit the reply button, but no matter. Best, Mark From: [log in to unmask] To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: Two more responses to Jacket Heaney debate Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2009 12:07:57 +0100 You did mean this to go back channel didn't you? Yes, they are all the same person. Cheers Tim On 6 Apr 2009, at 11:40, Mark McGahon wrote: Tim, first let me say that I thought that Desmond Swords, I Des Jeff and Anruth Grade 6 were all the same person, and possibly many others also (as I only checked the first two pages of my inbox). Hope that clears up my point about the many alies of Desmond Swords or whatever his name really is... Secondly, I do not argue that Jeffrey's posts were out of order; in fact my opinion is quite the opposite. Both Jeffrey's and Desmond Swords's were fine as far as I am concerned and whilst it is clear who the more decorous party was in the debacle, I don't think that warning Desmond Swords about his volume and tone was necessary. This is the point I was aiming at. With regards to your last post, I think I agree with more or less everything else you said and luckily I got the humorous anger you were aiming for towards the end. All the best, Mark. > From: [log in to unmask] > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: Two more responses to Jacket Heaney debate > Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2009 10:25:34 +0100 > CC: [log in to unmask]; [log in to unmask] > > High Mark, - (get it - high mark) - you first..... > > You said you wanted to distance yourself from Desmond's alies - What > alies? If there are any we haven't witnessed them here, and your > notion of Jeffrey's post as being out of order is just ridiculous. I > don't care one way or another, either, if Desmond's posts were 'out > of order', that's for the list owners to decide, all I care about is > that they were crap. Now that might be construed as being 'out of > order', fair enough, this is what being out of order means, if it > means anything, not someone setting out a critical case, as Jeffrey > did, in response to Heaneys half-assed answers in that original > interview. > > OK Desmond - I am not going to patronize you. You talk a load of > bollocks - and that's it really. Anger allied to humour is a very > difficult thing to express in this flat medium, etc > > Cheers > > Tim A. > > Get the next generation of Free Windows Live Services Click here! = = _________________________________________________________________ Get 30 Free Emoticons for your Windows Live Messenger http://www.livemessenger-emoticons.com/funfamily/en-ie/