Re: encapsulating directory operations

"Richard Heathfield" <rjh@cpax.org.uk> wrote in message
news:100jkvt$2m0ln$1@dont-email.me...

On 20/05/2025 22:51, Paul Edwards wrote:

That's a complete and utter lie.

>
That's a complete and utter over-reaction.

Has no-one ever lied you saying something? Calling
the lying statement a lie  is hardly an over-reaction.
Suing him for defamation of character might be though.
Maybe. Only maybe.

What is an "over-reaction" or "incorrect reaction" is,
after pressing him for evidence of such a claim, and
he can't produce even one single message with such
a claim - not one - just arm-waves "decades of
messages" - again - out of decades of  messages -
can't quote one - not one - responding with "oh,
I'll just take your word for it", instead of calling
him a probable liar yourself, given that he didn't
present one single message as evidence.

This group takes such things to heart.

I doubt this group speaks with one voice, but I can't
be bothered checking that.

If you seek a helpful
reaction from this group, you'd do better to keep the tone
non-inflammatory

Your advice is better directed at Scott. He's the one
who made the original inflammatory statement in
question.

and rebut such claims quietly and dispassionately

Ask Scott to MAKE such claims quietly and
dispassionately, such as:

"Could you please confirm whether MSDOS is the only
system  you are interested in?" or somesuch.

rather than jump on your destrier and grab your
lance.

He wasn't wielding a lance when lying about me,
completely unprovoked? Check your blinkers.

You've already been badged a 'troll'.

Do you even know what a "troll" is?

Try not to let the cap fit.

If anyone was being a troll, it was Scott. So far he has
generated several messages from the troll.

I don't think he was being a troll personally. I think he
was merely being a jackass. YMMV.

Try not to let the cap fit.

Try not to join him.

And try not to accept future ridiculous claims from Scott
on trust. He's not trustworthy.

BFN. Paul.