On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 1:28 PM, Luke -Jr luke@dashjr.org wrote:
You assume a generalization is meant to be all inclusive, which, even if meant to be, is never factually accurate. In my case, I never intend generalizations to be all inclusive.
You seem to be avoiding the fact that what you said was untrue. You could have said in your defense that you were using hyperbole when you should have been more precise. That would have sufficiently explained why you said what you said - after all, I think all of us here probably have made the same mistake in our speaking at some time.
However, you seem to be claiming that somehow you meant what you said but I was just too ignorant to understand it. The response you just gave was, to put it in technical terms, a "giant load of BS".
I'm not stupid Luke. Don't try and wordsmith reality so that generalizations aren't really generalizations. Your original statement was either just ignorance of how Gnome works (which seems unlikely) or just old-fashioned hyperbole.
Jeffrey.