in reply to Re^10: [OT] How about a 'Related Topics' (Off Topic) Section?
in thread [OT] How about an Off Topic Section?

It is clear that you have an agenda to get this OT section put in and you'll stop at nothing to get it.

I've no such agenda. I'm not the OP of this thread; just another supporter of its premise.

For the rest; come back when you've the balls to stop hiding behinds a cloak.

With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority". I'm with torvalds on this
In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice. Agile (and TDD) debunked
network sites:
  • Comment on Re^11: [OT] How about a 'Related Topics' (Off Topic) Section?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^12: [OT] How about a 'Related Topics' (Off Topic) Section?
by Anonymous Monk on Jun 08, 2015 at 22:33 UTC
    'I've no such agenda.'

    Actually, you've got '21000 posts that prove you wrong!'
[reply]

      Insulting as this comment (and all the others in the sub-thread) is, on its own, it is an excellent riposte. :)

      Regardless, this entire sub-thread ought to be aborted. There's nothing but insults here.

[reply]

      There's no arguing against "logic" like that. So I won't bother trying.

[reply]
        Kind of like you have not bothered to add the section yourself?
[reply]

In Section Perl Monks Discussion