Re: same *** marriage petition (Canada) .

"Marvin Edwards" <nospam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:ibhDb.640$SX1.252@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> "Gene Douglas" <genedoug@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:Qy6Db.40776$Bi3.11536@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> >Had you objected to a statement of his, it would be courteous to leave
in
> all of what you object to... <
>
> Well, for my responses to you, I suppose I can go back to posting the
entire
> post at the bottom like I was doing a while back.

At least, for the reader who would not look that far, I could go down and
get the parts which you avoided  showing, if the meaning of the response
is
unclear.
>
>
> "Gene Douglas" <genedoug@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:Qy6Db.40776$Bi3.11536@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > "Marvin Edwards" <nospam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> > news:Bq5Db.1449$Bg5.1438@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > "Gene Douglas" <genedoug@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> > > news:Ze3Db.5678$2Y5.2806@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > > > That's the whole point.  I already have expressed my thoughts. 
You
go
> > to
> > > extra work to remove them.  And what you respond to has been removed
by
> > the
> > > time you do. <
> > >
> > > Uh, Gene, your thoughts are still there in your posts. I have no way
to
> > > remove them. As to what appears in my posts, that is up to me, not
you.
> As
> > > long as I do not misrepresent you, I may snip whatever I feel is
> > irrelevant.
> >
> > Unfortunately, you also snip what you feel is relevant.
> >
> > > I do not believe I have been misrepresenting you. If you have an
example
> > > where you think I have, then post it, and I'll see if you're right.
If
> you
> > > are, I will apologize and try to be more careful.  But so far, we're
> > > discussing an example which does not seem to exist. Hey, take a look
at
> > how
> > > I responded to Mr. Edgar's post. He made some pretty nasty
accusations
> > > against a UU Church in Canada. I snipped everything except what I
wish
ed
> > to
> > > explicitly deal with. I saw no reason to repeat his accusations in
my
> > post.
> > > I believe I did the right thing. If I followed your policy, then his
> > > accusations would be spread all over every post in the friggin
thread!
> > >
> > So long as you are sympathetic and agreeable with him, he probably
won't
> > complain.  Had you objected to a statement of his, it would be
courteous
> to
> > leave in all of what you object to, rather than to quote a phrase out
of
> > context, as if that is what you disagree with.
> >
>
>