Re^3: Just curious: is there a BOT that downvotes "me?"

I'd like to apologise. I down-voted your post above; and I regret having done so.

At first reading -- scanning really -- I did not recognise the only somewhat familiar piece you were 'paraphrasing', and interpreted it as a 'in support of individual freedoms' and anti-'collective actions' piece.

Having re-read it, I think it is in support of the idea that: an individual's freedoms must be curtailed, where their exercise encroaches on or curtails the individual rights of others.

I can't give the vote back, nor correct by another upvote; so please accept my apology.

Even if I was right originally; and am now mistaking your intent; the fact that I voted on the basis of what I expected from you, rather than what you are actually saying, means that I should not have voted. To that end, I encourage people to downvote (or at least non-vote) this apology.

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".

In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.

I'm with torvalds on this Agile (and TDD) debunked I told'em LLVM was the way to go. But did they listen!

Comment on Re^3: Just curious: is there a BOT that downvotes "me?"

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: Just curious: is there a BOT that downvotes "me?" by chacham (Prior) on Jul 16, 2015 at 12:49 UTC
Thank you for apologizing, though it really is not required. I expect downvotes (as one should). And, it doesn't even show up in the tally. a 'in support of individual freedoms' and anti-'collective actions' piece. Even in the other posts, i was not advocating one position over the other. It just bothers me when people excuse their own choices by saying the other options have no merit. This is sometimes done unconsciously, by not evaluating the other side properly. My comments were merely to bring out the other side. Once someone says they understand it (and i believe them) but they still choose what they choose, i stop. Regardless, over here, eyepopslikeamosquito's listing reminded me of the DOI, to the point where i thought it'd be funnier (and to the point) with it. So, i added my comment. I did debate it for a moment because it makes it sound like i am for these ideas. But, humor won out. :) To be clear, i am neither for nor against taking action. the fact that I voted on the basis of what I expected from you, rather than what you are actually saying, means that I should not have voted. I appreciate the sentiment. Thank you.	[reply]
Re^4: Just curious: is there a BOT that downvotes "me?" by trippledubs (Deacon) on Jul 17, 2015 at 02:59 UTC
Not the first time its been ruefully down voted by the British	[reply]
Re^5: Just curious: is there a BOT that downvotes "me?" by Anonymous Monk on Jul 17, 2015 at 07:03 UTC
s/the/a/	[reply]
Re^4: Just curious: is there a BOT that downvotes "me?" by shmem (Chancellor) on Aug 14, 2015 at 15:53 UTC
Even if I was right originally; and am now mistaking your intent; the fact that I voted on the basis of what I expected from you, rather than what you are actually saying, means that I should not have voted. To that end, I encourage people to downvote (or at least non-vote) this apology. Upvoted for apologising and to counter your encouragement - there is no such thing as penitence by downvote. Posts get votes, yours is fine. Ask the gods to sack your XP - I can't, and wouldn't ;-) perl -le'print map{pack c,($-++?1:13)+ord}split//,ESEL'	[reply] [d/l]
Re^4: Just curious: is there a BOT that downvotes "me?" by Anonymous Monk on Jul 15, 2015 at 21:50 UTC
B-to-the-UK wrote: I did not recognise the only somewhat familiar piece... I believe he's spoofing the Magna Carta, yes?	[reply]
Re^5: Just curious: is there a BOT that downvotes "me?" by AnomalousMonk (Archbishop) on Jul 15, 2015 at 23:08 UTC
The United States Declaration of Independence. Give a man a fish: `<%-(-(-(-<`	[reply] [d/l]


go ahead... be a heretic
	PerlMonks