i18n@... wrote:

>
> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
> > i
> > >
> > > If you want someone else's definition, I suggest you ask him or her
> > > directly yourself.
> >
> > Have I not been doing so for weeks?
>
> If you ask someone and they don't answer, well, that is not really my
> problem, nor is it pertinent to the list. Maybe they don't want to be
> drawn into your rhetorical abuse would be my speculation, but it is only
> speculation, not open for debate.

Then why did you tell me, speciously, to ask him?

> > > The definitions seems vague, but it is a vague area, so that is OK by
> > > me. I was just wondering...
> >
> > Which definitions seem vague, what's vague about the area, and why is
> > that OK?
>
> It is OK because I asked the question, you answered it, and that was all
> I was looking for. I can make use of that while I ponder some other
> stuff it is related to. If I need more clarification, I will post back
> here at that time.

All _you_ were looking for? If you're not interested in having a
conversation about your views, then don't state your views. Does it not
occur to you that indications of "vagueness" might be taken into account
in a reformulation?
--
Peter T. Daniels grammatim@...