I think Greg interpreted "knowledge" as being on your part rather than on
the part of the OP. Your meaning was clear to me, viz., "I will not assume
that the OP already knows what I'm about to say if he hasn't said so."
It is not unusual to have to assume that an OP may not actually have enough
knowledge to frame the right question, that is, that the question, as
stated, may not represent the actual question or problem, and the solution
may lie elsewhere than in an answer to the exact question asked.
--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA
http://word.mvps.org
"Peter T. Daniels" wrote in message
...
If you don't see that the two comments "less than a month apart" make
exactly the same point, then it's clear that you have _major_
comprehension problems.
On Nov 16, 9:27 am, "Greg Maxey"
wrote:
Does Mr. Daniels imagine that people have nothing else to do with their
lives than study the posting times of his mostly incorrect posts?
Unlike your stalkers, as you like to call them, you rarely know the right
answer to any question.
I will not assume knowledge not explicit in their postings.
Oh really? Now there is a sharp reversal of habit. Who crowed these words
less than a month ago?
"Try reading for _content_ and _context_ rather than, as you always do,
only for the specific question asked, where a more sensitive reader
can intuit what's actually going on from what is unsaid."
Cheers.