By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
457,930 Members | 1,381 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 457,930 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

Attributes (net1.1) Quick answer needed

P: n/a
Hi all,

Sorry I have no time to test this myself....

Can I add the same attribute to a field twice?

Eg.

[MyAttr(), MyAttr(), MyAttr()]
Public string myField;
I ask because I would like to use it for interchangable profiles for
datagrid display.

Eg.
[DataGridCol(1, "User Name"), DataGridCol(2, "Login")]
Public string UserName;
Any help would be great, thanks!
I need a quick answer,

Cheers,
Steve

Mar 6 '06 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
55 Replies


P: n/a
"Steven Nagy" <le*********@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:11********************@v46g2000cwv.googlegrou ps.com...
Hi all,

Sorry I have no time to test this myself....


Surely testing it yourself will be quicker than asking here.....

Michael
Mar 6 '06 #2

P: n/a
Re: Attributes (net1.1) Quick answer needed

As opposed to other questions where the posters can wait a week or two.
Mar 6 '06 #3

P: n/a
>Can I add the same attribute to a field twice?

Yes, if the attribute class has AttributeUsage.AllowMultiple=true
Mattias

--
Mattias Sjögren [C# MVP] mattias @ mvps.org
http://www.msjogren.net/dotnet/ | http://www.dotnetinterop.com
Please reply only to the newsgroup.
Mar 6 '06 #4

P: n/a
"Mattias Sjögren" <ma********************@mvps.org> wrote in message
news:ek**************@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
Can I add the same attribute to a field twice?


Yes, if the attribute class has AttributeUsage.AllowMultiple=true


It probably is better to have one attribute though and pass in an array (I
presume that works?).

Michael
Mar 6 '06 #5

P: n/a
> "Mattias Sjögren" <ma********************@mvps.org> wrote in message
news:ek**************@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
Can I add the same attribute to a field twice?

Yes, if the attribute class has AttributeUsage.AllowMultiple=true

It probably is better to have one attribute though and pass in an
array (I presume that works?).

Michael


Again, it should be faster to just test it. Or look in the documentation
for the attribute class in question. In particular, look at the constructors
for the attribute to see what you're allowed to pass.

--
Lasse Vågsæther Karlsen
http://usinglvkblog.blogspot.com/
mailto:la***@vkarlsen.no
PGP KeyID: 0x2A42A1C2
Mar 6 '06 #6

P: n/a
"Steven Nagy" <le*********@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:11********************@v46g2000cwv.googlegrou ps.com...
Hi all,

Sorry I have no time to test this myself....


Please reread this and consider how rude it sounds.

Most people who might reply like to consider themselves to be a source of
knowledge and they help out, at least in part, from the not particularly
altruistic feeling of intellectual superiority.

Your post might well be interpreted a implying that you are the intellectual
and knowledgeable equal of anyone replying but that your time is more
valuable.

This may or may not be true but it is not going to endear you to anyone.
Mar 6 '06 #7

P: n/a
>It probably is better to have one attribute though and pass in an array

Why?
Mattias

--
Mattias Sjögren [C# MVP] mattias @ mvps.org
http://www.msjogren.net/dotnet/ | http://www.dotnetinterop.com
Please reply only to the newsgroup.
Mar 6 '06 #8

P: n/a
Luckily I am not here to make friend heh?

If I was the "the intellectual and knowledgeable equal" of anyone here,
then I probably wouldn't be asking the question.

I like to contribute as much to this community as I can. I like to help
others.
However yesterday I was in a pickle and was not in a position to sit at
a computer with VS on it; I was at a client's office.
I needed to know the answer and was not in a position to find it out
myself.

So here's my advice to you Nick:
Reread your post and consider how rude it was and how many assumptions
you jumped to.
I do consider this forum to be a community since a lot of the same
people return and help others and like to consider myself as part of
that community.
I had no real time to properly explain my situation. It seems to me now
days that people are more interested in finding the faults in other
people's posts rather than just being helpful.

Hopefully you never find yourself in the same position as me Nick
because you may not have anyone to rely on if you act like this with
people you know.

To all the others who answered, many thanks, it did help. It was not a
situation where I could get to any help docs except for MSDN online and
I don't usually frequent that space so it was hard for me to find an
answer.
The attribute in question was actually a custom made attribute.

I am not sure about the array solution but it might also be a
possibility. I am not fantastic at attribute usage and have had trouble
constructing calls to attributes that were any more complex than a few
simple value types.

Once again, thanks to all those who contributed something useful.

Steve

Mar 6 '06 #9

P: n/a
like it or not, the terms "Sorry I have no time to test this
myself...." and "Quick answer needed" rubbed several people the wrong
way.

I don't believe Nick was rude, nor was he making assumptions... just
pointing out that the way you emphasized your urgency could be taken as
rude... in which case I'd have to agree wholeheartedly.

And your response didn't do much to help your case.

In the future, I'd stick to just asking or answering questions. If you
had left out "Sorry I have no time to test this myself....", "Quick
answer needed", and "I need a quick answer", chances are the question
would have been answered just as quick, and your post wouldnt have
offended anyone.

Mar 6 '06 #10

P: n/a
"Mattias Sjögren" <ma********************@mvps.org> wrote in message
news:e4**************@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
It probably is better to have one attribute though and pass in an array


Why?


It's just neater.

Michael
Mar 6 '06 #11

P: n/a
"Lasse Vågsæther Karlsen" <la***@vkarlsen.no> wrote in message
news:a0*************************@news.microsoft.co m...
Again, it should be faster to just test it. Or look in the documentation
for the attribute class in question. In particular, look at the
constructors for the attribute to see what you're allowed to pass.
I'm presuming this is a custom attribute.

--
Lasse Vågsæther Karlsen
http://usinglvkblog.blogspot.com/
mailto:la***@vkarlsen.no
PGP KeyID: 0x2A42A1C2

Mar 6 '06 #12

P: n/a
Once again, luckily I am not here to make friends heh?

If my simple post requesting haste actually "offended" someone then
that person should perhaps be seeking psychological treatment?
Further, if there was actual offence taken, then those individuals
should speak up and I shall call them personally to apologise.

Personally I think that your statement that I have offended people was
used a little too loosely. If people are going to get worked up over a
simple post like mine then the issue is their's, not mine.

Still, I am sorry to all those I have offended. Please email me
"le*********@hotmail.com" and I will call you to apologise in person.

Maybe we can all get together and have a cry about the whole thing?
Loosen up people, life's too short to worry about little stuff like
this. Get over it.

Mar 6 '06 #13

P: n/a
"Steven Nagy" <le*********@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:11**********************@p10g2000cwp.googlegr oups.com...
Once again, luckily I am not here to make friends heh?

If my simple post requesting haste actually "offended" someone then
that person should perhaps be seeking psychological treatment?
Further, if there was actual offence taken, then those individuals
should speak up and I shall call them personally to apologise.
I have to agree with Nick and Michael here. You're initial post was a little
rude and some people pointed that out. You should apologize and move on,
instead of trying desperately to talk your way out of it.
Loosen up people, life's too short to worry about little stuff like
this. Get over it.


I suggest it is you who needs to loosen up and get over it.

Michael
Mar 7 '06 #14

P: n/a
Oh my god, I didn't realise that so many programmers were such whiney
little cry babies.

My post:
I am sorry to all those I have offended
Your reply:
You should apologize and move on
What else do you want from me? Have you emailed me your phone number?
I will call you to apologise in person. Make sure you include country
code as I am calling from Australia.
Loosen up people, life's too short to worry about little stuff like
this. Get over it.

I suggest it is you who needs to loosen up and get over it


I suggest it is time you shut the hell up. You and your little cry baby
friends can all get together and watch a chick flick while eating a
bowl of chocolate ice-cream, crying your eyes out.
If some tiny little statement that wasn't even directed at you can
cause you 'offence' then see previous post regarding seeking help.
Otherwise, try to contribute something useful to the conversation.

Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.

Mar 7 '06 #15

P: n/a
"Steven Nagy" <le*********@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:11**********************@z34g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com...
I suggest it is time you shut the hell up. You and your little cry baby
friends can all get together and watch a chick flick while eating a
bowl of chocolate ice-cream, crying your eyes out.


You do realise the irony here don't you? Every reply to you has been quite
polite and it is *you* who is getting angry and upset yet you are telling us
to chill out, let it go and stop crying.

Michael
Mar 7 '06 #16

P: n/a
What makes you think I am getting upset or angry?
I am interested to know what power you possess that lets you detect my
emotion based on what I type.
Because I am not angry or upset. I am actually quite entertained!
I find this all mildly amusing.
The only reason I keep replying is because you keep making stupid
points.
What other insights do you have to share with the world?

Mar 7 '06 #17

P: n/a
"Steven Nagy" <le*********@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:11*********************@v46g2000cwv.googlegro ups.com...
What makes you think I am getting upset or angry?
I am interested to know what power you possess that lets you detect my
emotion based on what I type.
What you type shows your emotions to some degree at least and you are
certainly upset and angry. If you weren't you would have said right at the
start "Oh I see what you mean, sorry guys". But you really are desperate not
to do that.
Because I am not angry or upset. I am actually quite entertained!
I find this all mildly amusing.
The only reason I keep replying is because you keep making stupid
points.


Irony yet again.

Michael
Mar 7 '06 #18

P: n/a
>> you are certainly upset and angry

Wow, what university did you get your psychology degree at?
Obviously they are just handing them out...
"Oh I see what you mean, sorry guys".


I probably would have except for a constant barrage of self-indulged
stupid remarks.
But I still can't comprehend how piss weak you all are.
"Oh no, he said something I don't like. I feel so offended... boo hoo"
Give me a break. Are all Americans like you? Shouldn't you be spending
more time oppressing 3rd world countries or something?

Mar 7 '06 #19

P: n/a
"Steven Nagy" <le*********@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:11**********************@z34g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com...
Wow, what university did you get your psychology degree at?
Obviously they are just handing them out...
It don't take no psych degree to work out you're angry and upset.
I probably would have except for a constant barrage of self-indulged
stupid remarks.
Ok, but any remarks came *after* you started scrambling.
But I still can't comprehend how piss weak you all are.
"Oh no, he said something I don't like. I feel so offended... boo hoo"
This is amazing the *you* are saying this. Everyone here was making polite
suggestions, it was you who was too weak to cop those comments on the chin
and got offended. Read back over the posts.
Give me a break. Are all Americans like you? Shouldn't you be spending
more time oppressing 3rd world countries or something?


I'm not an America.

Michael
Mar 7 '06 #20

P: n/a
Steven Nagy wrote:
Luckily I am not here to make friend heh?


No, but you might want to consider the possibility that you'll want to
ask a question here again. I suspect that after reading this thread,
next time you ask a question many people will just move on to the next
post. There are always more questions to answer...

Jon

Mar 7 '06 #21

P: n/a
"Give me a break. Are all Americans like you? Shouldn't you be spending

more time oppressing 3rd world countries or something? "

unreal...

if people weren't offended or disgusted already, then they almost
certainly are now.

the fact of the matter is, whether intentional or not, it is clear that
the first post of this thread can be and has been interpreted as rude.

If you are unable to see that, then God help you.

P.S. - as far as your "what university did you get your psychology
degree at?" comment, I believe it was you who said:
"If my simple post requesting haste actually "offended" someone then
that person should perhaps be seeking psychological treatment? "

Mar 7 '06 #22

P: n/a
> Once again, luckily I am not here to make friends heh?

If my simple post requesting haste actually "offended" someone then
that person should perhaps be seeking psychological treatment?
Further, if there was actual offence taken, then those individuals
should speak up and I shall call them personally to apologise.

Personally I think that your statement that I have offended people was
used a little too loosely. If people are going to get worked up over a
simple post like mine then the issue is their's, not mine.

Still, I am sorry to all those I have offended. Please email me
"le*********@hotmail.com" and I will call you to apologise in person.

Maybe we can all get together and have a cry about the whole thing?
Loosen up people, life's too short to worry about little stuff like
this. Get over it.


Your initial post somehow suggested that posting here was somehow faster
than actually testing it yourself. Or, let me word this another way: Your
time is too valuable to actually test and implement something, so you hoped
someone else would do that for you and tell you the right answer. In summary,
instead of spending 5 minutes testing it you spent 1 minute firing off a
newsgroup post and hoped someone else would do your job.

The responses, mine included, suggested that testing it would be faster in
the sense that you would have the answer sooner. If, on the other hand, your
way of "faster" means "I hope someone else will do my job" then I'm sorry
to disappoint you, the world does not work this way, nor does the newsgroups.

In real life, most of the time anyway, things work on the basis that "you
get what you pay for". In the newsgroups, your "payment" to put it like this
is simply the assumption that if you're given an answer to your question
you might spend some time here, actually answering some questions yourself.

Since you've demonstrated that you think your time is more valuable than
ours, I'd say the chance of that is zilch. As such what you got was close
to nothing, as it should be.

Finally, if your goal with your posts on this newsgroup is, as you so eloquently
posted above, "I am not here to make friends" then I'd say you succeeded.

Basically you've made sure nobody that reads these newsgroups over time will
even remotely think of answering any question you might have in the future.
Additionally, employers who use Google when interviewing people might think
twice about your skills and ability to fit into a workplace. We all make
choices, most of the time they come back to us one way or another.

And yes, life is too short to worry about little stuff like this, which is
why you probably ended up in a lot of killfilters today.

Mine included.

--
Lasse Vågsæther Karlsen
http://usinglvkblog.blogspot.com/
mailto:la***@vkarlsen.no
PGP KeyID: 0x2A42A1C2
Mar 7 '06 #23

P: n/a
This cracked me up! You are a funny guy.
I love freedom of speech. It means that someone like you can input into
a conversation without reading all the previous posts.
I'll just reference one paragraph of one of my previous posts to help
you get up to speed with the conversation:

"
I like to contribute as much to this community as I can. I like to help

others.
However yesterday I was in a pickle and was not in a position to sit at

a computer with VS on it; I was at a client's office.
I needed to know the answer and was not in a position to find it out
myself.
"

Really, you should also do a search to see how much I have contributed
to this group.
I do more than my share to help others. So you really should do your
research before making ignorant comments.

Mar 7 '06 #24

P: n/a
I can't believe that you jumped on this band wagon of all people.
I thought that you were more mature and intelligent than these other
cry babies.

I come to this group everyday to see if there are any questions to
answer.
Then when I needed some urgent help, I get cained for it.

Its a shame that this is what "community" means now days.

Mar 7 '06 #25

P: n/a
"Steven Nagy" <le*********@hotmail.com> wrote in message
Really, you should also do a search to see how much I have contributed
to this group.
I do more than my share to help others. So you really should do your
research before making ignorant comments.


Who said you didn't contribute? All everyone has been saying is that your
initial post was rude and your subsequent posts have been getting ruder and
ruder in a desperate attempt to somehow prove you aren't rude. Even you
should see the funny side of that :-)

Michael
Mar 8 '06 #26

P: n/a
"Steven Nagy" <le*********@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:11**********************@e56g2000cwe.googlegr oups.com...
I can't believe that you jumped on this band wagon of all people.
I thought that you were more mature and intelligent than these other
cry babies.


When everyone is giving you a hard time perhaps you should stop and consider
maybe there is a reason for it.

Michael
Mar 8 '06 #27

P: n/a
I accept that I may have been rude in later posts, but definately not
in the original.
I was simply trying to convey urgency.
Unfortunately it was interpreted incorrectly, and that is not my fault.
And unfortunately, pointing out that someone else is rude, is in fact
rude in itself, especially when the other person was not being rude.

Mar 8 '06 #28

P: n/a
Have you ever seen the movie "Brazil"?

I think that in this situation, I am a lot like the main character, and
the rest of you are a lot like the oppressive government.

But its ok... if you lock me up in a military base in Cuba, you can do
whatever you like to me and you can finally shut me up, perhaps even
brain wash me a bit.

I love you guys.

Mar 8 '06 #29

P: n/a
Have you ever seen the movie "Brazil"?

I think that in this situation, I am a lot like the main character, and
the rest of you are a lot like the oppressive government.

But its ok... if you lock me up in a military base in Cuba, you can do
whatever you like to me and you can finally shut me up, perhaps even
brain wash me a bit.

I love you guys.

Mar 8 '06 #30

P: n/a
"Steven Nagy" <le*********@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:11********************@j52g2000cwj.googlegrou ps.com...
I accept that I may have been rude in later posts, but definately not
in the original.
I was simply trying to convey urgency.
Unfortunately it was interpreted incorrectly, and that is not my fault.
And unfortunately, pointing out that someone else is rude, is in fact
rude in itself, especially when the other person was not being rude.


A accept you didn't mean to be rude but your initial post definately did
come across as rude. You can be the replies.

Michael
Mar 8 '06 #31

P: n/a
let me try that again ... :-)

"Steven Nagy" <le*********@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:11********************@j52g2000cwj.googlegrou ps.com...
I accept that I may have been rude in later posts, but definately not
in the original.
I was simply trying to convey urgency.
Unfortunately it was interpreted incorrectly, and that is not my fault.
And unfortunately, pointing out that someone else is rude, is in fact
rude in itself, especially when the other person was not being rude.


I accept you didn't mean to be rude but your initial post definately did
come across as rude. You can tell by the replies.

Michael
Mar 8 '06 #32

P: n/a
So should those people who responded perhaps have sought clarification
about my intentions first instead of delivering a speech worth of an
oscar?

Mar 8 '06 #33

P: n/a
"Steven Nagy" <le*********@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:11**********************@i40g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com...
So should those people who responded perhaps have sought clarification
about my intentions first instead of delivering a speech worth of an
oscar?


These people were about as polite as they could have been, I'm not sure what
more you want. Nick said your post "sounds rude", he seemed to assume you
didn't mean it so there was no need to ask for clarification.

Michael
Mar 8 '06 #34

P: n/a
What I don't understand is that despite perception, most people were
more interested in criticising than answering the question.
Why not answer first, then criticise later? Especially as Nick
indicated that the post "sounds rude" but if he personally wasn't sure,
he could still have answered the question.
But rather than solving the problem, more people were insterested in
"educating" me in the "appropriates" of group postings.

Luckily someone was more interested in actually serving a useful
purpose rather than just deciding to point out the faults of others.

Thanks to Mattias for the quick answer.

Mar 8 '06 #35

P: n/a
Steven Nagy <le*********@hotmail.com> wrote:
I can't believe that you jumped on this band wagon of all people.
I thought that you were more mature and intelligent than these other
cry babies.
I've always stuck up for courtesy in the group.
I come to this group everyday to see if there are any questions to
answer.
Then when I needed some urgent help, I get cained for it.
Yes, because you asked for it in a slightly rude way, and then
responded in a very rude way when you were called on that. Do you
understand that if you'd just explained to start with that you were on
a computer without VS on it, instead of saying you didn't have *time*
to test it for yourself, and that a "quick answer" was needed, none of
this would have happened? Pretty much every question on here is
important to the person asking it - everyone would *like* a quick
answer.
Its a shame that this is what "community" means now days.


Community includes being polite. You weren't, in my view and clearly in
the view of others.

--
Jon Skeet - <sk***@pobox.com>
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/jon.skeet
If replying to the group, please do not mail me too
Mar 8 '06 #36

P: n/a
Steven Nagy <le*********@hotmail.com> wrote:
What I don't understand is that despite perception, most people were
more interested in criticising than answering the question.
The question had been answered (by Mattias) less than two hours after
you asked it.
Why not answer first, then criticise later? Especially as Nick
indicated that the post "sounds rude" but if he personally wasn't sure,
he could still have answered the question.


The question had already been answered. What good would duplication of
that answer have done?

--
Jon Skeet - <sk***@pobox.com>
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/jon.skeet
If replying to the group, please do not mail me too
Mar 8 '06 #37

P: n/a
Ok. So what, specifically, about my post implies that I haven't read
all of the previous posts?
Also, which of the comments made in the post you responded to were
ignorant?

Steven Nagy wrote:
This cracked me up! You are a funny guy.
I love freedom of speech. It means that someone like you can input into
a conversation without reading all the previous posts.
I'll just reference one paragraph of one of my previous posts to help
you get up to speed with the conversation:

"
I like to contribute as much to this community as I can. I like to help

others.
However yesterday I was in a pickle and was not in a position to sit at

a computer with VS on it; I was at a client's office.
I needed to know the answer and was not in a position to find it out
myself.
"

Really, you should also do a search to see how much I have contributed
to this group.
I do more than my share to help others. So you really should do your
research before making ignorant comments.


Mar 8 '06 #38

P: n/a
Ok. So what, specifically, about my post implies that I haven't read
all of the previous posts?
Also, which of the comments made in the post you responded to were
ignorant?

Steven Nagy wrote:
This cracked me up! You are a funny guy.
I love freedom of speech. It means that someone like you can input into
a conversation without reading all the previous posts.
I'll just reference one paragraph of one of my previous posts to help
you get up to speed with the conversation:

"
I like to contribute as much to this community as I can. I like to help

others.
However yesterday I was in a pickle and was not in a position to sit at

a computer with VS on it; I was at a client's office.
I needed to know the answer and was not in a position to find it out
myself.
"

Really, you should also do a search to see how much I have contributed
to this group.
I do more than my share to help others. So you really should do your
research before making ignorant comments.


Mar 8 '06 #39

P: n/a
I have never seen any posts by Steve Nagy before, but after reading
this thread, I will make it a point to not answer any of his posts. I
really dislike it when people say they need an "quick answer". I just
skip over those postings

Mar 8 '06 #40

P: n/a
Well I hope that I have made it clear now that its only about how the
words are interpreted.
I never had any intention of rudeness, just was in a position where I
had to get something on the board quickly for response.
I mean, it would be complete stupidity to intentionally be rude, and
still expect a quick answer.
But people's nature is to assume the worst about someone, which is what
happened in my case.
They assumed that I was being rude, rather than being given the chance
to explain later when I was back in my office.

I would have thought that a religious person would have known better
than to judge someone in this way.
But then, religion and morality have not always gone hand-in-hand.

Mar 8 '06 #41

P: n/a
>> I have never seen any posts by Steve Nagy
Try doing a search.
but after reading this thread, I will make it a point to not answer any of his posts Haha, nice one! This statement is a catch 22.
I just skip over those postings

If any of your other posts were anything like this one, I'd gladly not
have you answering them.

Mar 8 '06 #42

P: n/a
Sorry mate, I clicked the REPLY link under your post but was actually
responding to the one below it at the time from someone else.
Its hard to manage all this spam.

I do apologise for the mistake.

Being as popular as I am, I find it hard to respond to everyone's
comments.
I seem to be the only one here with a job.

Mar 8 '06 #43

P: n/a
Steven Nagy <le*********@hotmail.com> wrote:
Well I hope that I have made it clear now that its only about how the
words are interpreted.
No, it's also about how the words were put across in the first place.
You seem to be trying to get away from having *any* responsibility for
the rudeness in your first post. Whether or not it was intentional,
your post came across as rude. Not just to one person, but to several
people. If I explained something one way and thought I'd done a really
good job, but loads of people said they still didn't understand it, I
wouldn't think that was *their* fault - I'd think it was mine.
I never had any intention of rudeness, just was in a position where I
had to get something on the board quickly for response.
But it seems to me that you didn't stop to think about how to put your
question in the best way. Spending an extra minute or two on a post can
often make the difference between a positive response and a negative
response.
I mean, it would be complete stupidity to intentionally be rude, and
still expect a quick answer.
And yet you've been intentionally rude since then, even after various
people have said that it'll harm the chances of getting an answer to
future questions.
But people's nature is to assume the worst about someone, which is what
happened in my case.
No, I think in your case you wrote a post without stopping to think
about courtesy. People interpreted it straightforwardly - it wasn't in
line with your original intention, but your first post didn't make your
intention clear, so that's understandable. As I said before, if you'd
just explained the situation to start with as you did later on (you
weren't in the office, you were on a computer which didn't have .NET on
it, so you couldn't test it) and not put on the "Quick answer needed"
then I'm sure none of this would have happened.
They assumed that I was being rude, rather than being given the chance
to explain later when I was back in my office.
If you'd paid a little attention to courtesy to start with, there would
have been nothing to explain.
I would have thought that a religious person would have known better
than to judge someone in this way.
So being a Christian means I can't think that someone's being rude and
advise them that it's not a good idea? Odd.
But then, religion and morality have not always gone hand-in-hand.


I'm not entirely sure what you're trying to achieve at this point...
while I agree with your statement (and indeed it would be crazy not to)
I can't see any point in making it unless you're just trying to annoy
people.

--
Jon Skeet - <sk***@pobox.com>
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/jon.skeet
If replying to the group, please do not mail me too
Mar 9 '06 #44

P: n/a
Look, at the end of the day I can concede that I didn't get the right
information across to begin with.
However I will always put my back up when I get attacked about the
content of my post when that content was not deliberately rude.
So I also acknowledge that since that time, I have been deliberately
rude.

I understand your point about teaching. But I don't think its relevant;
you're trying to assimilate with a more extreme case.
It would be like me saying if I started deliberately swerving all over
the road, and you didn't move, so its your fault you got hit.
Its an extreme example that really has no bearing.

Mar 9 '06 #45

P: n/a
"Steven Nagy" <le*********@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:11**********************@j33g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
Look, at the end of the day I can concede that I didn't get the right
information across to begin with.
However I will always put my back up when I get attacked about the
content of my post when that content was not deliberately rude.
So I also acknowledge that since that time, I have been deliberately
rude.

I understand your point about teaching. But I don't think its relevant;
you're trying to assimilate with a more extreme case.
It would be like me saying if I started deliberately swerving all over
the road, and you didn't move, so its your fault you got hit.
Its an extreme example that really has no bearing.


Friggen hell steven, would you give up on this issue. Your initial post was
rude whether you meant it or not and the replies were totally justified. Try
uttering the words "I realise my initial post was rude and I apologise for
that", you'll fell much better. Stop trying to talk your way out of the
smallest issue in the history of mankind.

Michael
Mar 9 '06 #46

P: n/a
Now now don't get upset.
You see, this issue would disappear from your life if you just stopped
reading this thread.

Anyway, I'm not trying to talk my way out of anything, because I'm not
IN anything.
I'm merely discussing the semantics of what has occurred here.
And its obvious that you are not understand, because your statement:
"I realise my initial post was rude" is contradicting to everything we have been discussing here.
You can't say it "was" rude, because all it was, was "urgent".
It was perceived by some as rude, but mostly, as you pointed out, it
was the fact that some people might construe it as rude, not that it IS
rude.

Every reply to you has been quite polite
and it is *you* who is getting angry and upset
Do you still stand by these words now?
Friggen hell

Don't worry, I don't judge you for showing your emotions.
Its ok to let go sometimes.

Mar 9 '06 #47

P: n/a
In your first post:

You wrote (twice) that a quick answer was needed, suggesting that your
question is more important than anyone elses question.
You wrote that you "simply didnt have time to test it", suggesting that
your time is more important than anyone elses time.

You were rude to the population of people here to ask questions and
rude to the population of people answering them... pretty much everyone
who participates on the forum.

You can hide behind the ideas that it wasn't deliberate or intentional,
or that you had a good reason bec. you were on a computer without vs,
but you are not fooling anyone. noone has in any way, shape or form
agreed with you in your weak and illogical ways of defending yourself.
The statements were rude, not interpreted as rude, not mistaken as
rude, but just plain rude.

Mar 10 '06 #48

P: n/a
> You see, this issue would disappear from your life if you just stopped
reading this thread.
on the same note, it would disappear if you just admit that your inital
comment was rude/perceived as rude/ is rude,
whatever you want to call it
Anyway, I'm not trying to talk my way out of anything, because I'm not
IN anything.
I'm merely discussing the semantics of what has occurred here.
sounds like a waste of time to me.
You can't say it "was" rude, because all it was, was "urgent".
It was perceived by some as rude, but mostly, as you pointed out, it
was the fact that some people might construe it as rude, not that it IS
rude.


it was perceived rude because the way you put it, made it seem like
your time
was more important then everyone elses. You very well MAY NOT HAVE
intended it
to be perceived this way, but face the music and admit it already so
you can go on
with your life and stop whining.

I'm just reading this thread now to see you apologize. Maybe I'm
wasting my time as well then.

Mar 10 '06 #49

P: n/a
"Steven Nagy" <le*********@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:11**********************@e56g2000cwe.googlegr oups.com...
Now now don't get upset.
You see, this issue would disappear from your life if you just stopped
reading this thread.

Anyway, I'm not trying to talk my way out of anything, because I'm not
IN anything.
You are IN a situation where *many* people are telling you your post was
rude and you are refusing to believe that. It's not exactly a life
threatening situation but as small as it is you are in that.
I'm merely discussing the semantics of what has occurred here.
And its obvious that you are not understand, because your statement:
"I realise my initial post was rude" is contradicting to everything we have been discussing here.


No, it's only contradicting what's going on in your mind. All discussions
here have been about the rudeness of your post.
You can't say it "was" rude, because all it was, was "urgent".
No, it was rude. Get over it.
It was perceived by some as rude, but mostly, as you pointed out, it
was the fact that some people might construe it as rude, not that it IS
rude.


No, it was rude. You might not have intended it that way but that was the
way it was.
Every reply to you has been quite polite
and it is *you* who is getting angry and upset


Do you still stand by these words now?


Yes.

Michael
Mar 12 '06 #50

55 Replies

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.