It's over was: RI tax madness

"Peter Duniho" wrote:

Quit being so easily offended.

I'm not offended - you've made it clear you did not wish the
tax man on them.

I quoted it to be fair to you. It qualifies the possibility
that the tax man will come around, not your hope that he
does.

You presume to tell ME what MY own words mean?

No I told you what they "seemed" to mean. Who is being
offended here? :-)


Todd Pattist
(Remove DONTSPAMME from address to email reply.)
___
Make a commitment to learn something from every flight.
Share what you learn.

"Todd Pattist" wrote in message
...
You presume to tell ME what MY own words mean?

No

No? Yes:

"Todd Pattist" wrote in message
...
I quoted it to be fair to you. It qualifies the possibility
that the tax man will come around, not your hope that he
does.

You are arbitrarily and incorrectly misinterpreting the qualification in my
original statement.

Pete

"Peter Duniho" wrote:

You presume to tell ME what MY own words mean?

No

No? Yes:

No I told you how I understood them and why. I objected to
your immediate questioning of my friends' truthfulness and
perhaps let that color my interpretation of your words.
This sort of thing can happen with communication that is
devoid of associated clues in body language, and tone of
voice.

You are arbitrarily and incorrectly misinterpreting the qualification in my
original statement.

Interpreting your words is what I meant when I said I was
telling you what they "seemed" to mean. I'll accept that
you meant the qualification in the first sentence to apply
to your tax-man visit wish in the following sentence and you
should try to accept that I understood it otherwise in light
of the challenge to their veracity. You can object to my
interpretation, but it's what it was regardless of
objection.
Todd Pattist
(Remove DONTSPAMME from address to email reply.)
___
Make a commitment to learn something from every flight.
Share what you learn.