Mailing-List: contact user-help@struts.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Struts Users Mailing List" <user@struts.apache.org>
Received-SPF: unknown (herse.apache.org: error in processing during lookup of
 DNewton@hibbertgroup.com)
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: [OT] RE: That doesn't work ...
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2007 09:51:43 -0500
Message-ID: 
 <54C744011CC9C342BBA5E786176224260874EE23@HIBBERT-EVS01.HibbertNet.com>
Thread-Topic: [OT] RE: That doesn't work ...
Thread-Index: Acc0xfX7yM4EkccbQZeZNZ9eO1e8zAAAH5oA
From: "Dave Newton" <DNewton@hibbertgroup.com>
To: "Struts Users Mailing List" <user@struts.apache.org>

From: Christopher Schultz [mailto:chris@christopherschultz.net]
> If you were interested in answering the question, you should have
> asked for more information. Instead, you called the OT an idiot.

Actually, I suggested the poster to encapsulate the question and provide
enough information to allow people to answer it without having to
investigate further than the post, which in this case would have been
trivial.

It is a rare occasion that I will call people names and I take umbrage
at the suggestion that that is what I did, because clearly, I didn't.

I'd also suggest that telling a poster that providing more information
is more likely to lead to an answer is an implicit request for more
information, which seems obvious to me.

> If you aren't interested in answering the question, then don't bother
> posting.

... Hrm.

Dave


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org