dwightdhutto at gmail.com
Mon Sep 24 22:52:38 CEST 2012
Please stop responding to Mark. His behaviour is typical schoolyard
bully, meaning he's saying things precisely because he gets a reaction
from you. He probably doesn't even realise that he's doing it
consciously, but either way the best way to deal with such behaviour
is to stop giving such a person what they want, e.g. the reaction.
So, please just **stop responding** to any of his posts
I respond, to let him know that he just thinks I don't add context,
but lacks the ability to cheeck, that I do try to include context, but
in these question answer sessions, you should be following, the
conversation, which should put everything into context.
. He'll soon
grow bored and move on. If you had kept out of the conversation when
I'd originally replied to him then I'd have been able to take him to
task for his childish behaviour. As it stands now unfortunately,
Myles' thread has become a wasteland of exchanges between yourself and
him. Again: Please just stop responding to him.
Well, It's an argument, and I won't let him win. I could stop
responding, but then he would think he had won, and do it to someone
He's wrong. He took one response out of context, and assumed that is
what I do, when usually it's just I followed the conversation for
real, and if he had, then he would know the context in which a certain
comment was made.
Thank you sincerely,
On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 3:16 PM, Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> On 24/09/2012 17:52, Walter Prins wrote:
>> On 23 September 2012 22:53, Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> Is the personal sniping really necessary? (That's a rhetorical
>>>> question, just to be clear.)
>>> Well if Dwight insists on replying to something without quoting the
>>> so the rest of us haven't the faintest idea what he's talking about what
>>> we meant to do? Sadly my mind reading capabilities are quite low, I
>>> know about that for anyone else.
>> Well then tell him how to do it properly and/or provide a better
>> answer without the personal invective. No one expects you to read
>> minds obviously, but the personal attacks and sarcasm are really way
>> out of line. I can only hang my head in shame at what Myles must be
>> thinking of all this. So childish.
He only has one conversation to prove his point on, and I made the
point of telling him I was following a short conversation(at the
time), and therefore needed no context at the time, because the OP is
following the thread for the answer, and knows the context.
Walter's point of entry into the thread is of no concern to me,
because the OP is following the conversation. If Walter wants to know
the context, read the every post just like the OP would, because
that's who I'm responding to, not Walter.
> Dwight Hutto refers to my family as pigs and you have a go at
And when did I do that, please point out where I said that about your family.
> downright bloody check. We're here to teach Python. If he's too thick to
> understand context he can search the web for the word or resort to a
If you're too thick to understand that sometimes it's an offhand
remark to JUST the OP, then you don't understand the context of a
tutor session in which one person asks a question, and gets responses.
You also seem to have missed lots of other conversations, where my
replies are in line.
You want an argument, and in this case you lose, because you couldn't
understand the context of my remark, because you think that every time
I respond it's without inline responses.
You don't know enough about me to say I always quote out of context,
and I can provide the evidence that I do.
More information about the Tutor