The quoted email appears to contain a complete thought.

Terse, yes, but complete.

What else was he supposed to say?

The module author is free to disregard the request (and I don't mean that in a snarky way) without explanation. Common courtesy, however, demands a different tone in his reply. He very deliberately thumbed his nose. All he needed to say was "No, I'm not supporting MakeMaker". Instead, he acted like a child.

yours,
Michael

The module author is free to disregard the request (and I don't mean that in a snarky way) without explanation. Common courtesy, however, demands a different tone in his reply. He very deliberately thumbed his nose. All he needed to say was "No, I'm not supporting MakeMaker". Instead, he acted like a child.

So you support using Meditations as a place to whinge when module authors disregard and/or snub requests? That is what you appear to be defending you realize.

Howdy!

And have you stopped beathing your wife, Anonymous Monk?

The anonymous winge that I replied to had nothing to do with whether or not merlyn's post was appropriate to Meditations; it had to do with the "discussion" merlyn had with the module author.

I made no statement, express or implied, about whether this belongs in Meditations. (well, I sort of did elsewhere, but not in the subthread you cite)

Going off on a tangent, this thread has drawn an unusual number of anonymous replies. I suppose that many people feel a need to get in digs without taking responsibility for them. Cowardice comes to mind...

Update: the reasons articulated by the anonymous respondants for posting as AM do not refute my thesis...and I didn't think it was worth a whole node to say so...

yours,
Michael