What I found objectionable to your post was the wording, and to follow this up with the theft remark. To my mind this is not acceptable language for our community which is why I asked you to think about it. I would ask you again to think about it. I would also ask you again to carefully read all the posts made by her and look at the diagram she supplied. At no time did she say she was not paying for access only that she lived in a small time and could, with consent access her neighbours WLAN. I have further noted that while you say you do not know what a umts stick that a quick search would have told you what it was. Again I would kindly ask you if perhaps you have made a legal or moral judgement here and would think about it.
I am not having a go at you and I donāt want you to feel that. I am saying is that if I found your wording hard, then others would do so as well. This again is something I would ask you to think about . I hope this clears up my reasons why I replied as I did.
Thatās exactly what I was talking about. Thatās the problem right there.
Iām sorry if it seems like I tried to attack you. I never mean it this way, even if it may sound like that. I am used to heavy discussions, which implies that I am also used to participants who are heavily used to not being offended, because the idea, theory or opinion is discussed, never the person uttering it.
I would be careful when saying something like this. I agree with the first part, but I really wouldnāt word it like āthis is not acceptable languageā, because this sounds like certain words or opinions should be forbidden. I am an avid defender of freedom of speech, which implies that everyone should have the right to say what they think, even if it may offend someone. The only exception are speeches which actively call people to the use of violence. Everything else should be allowed.
Now a forum has obviously some stricter rules than that, and that is okay. That said, I agree that his post was written without enough knowledge (uninformed) regarding the topic, but I also donāt think it should be forbidden to say what he said, which would make his post deleted in the worst case scenario.
Thatās what I mean with uninformed. He simply didnāt read the whole thread. Honestly, I canāt blame him.
I would agree with this sentence much more than with:
@wgberninghausen Same here, we are just responding with our thoughts to your thoughts.
First, despite the disagreement, the discussion is still civil. Kudos to everyone here
This thread is going off-topic though and it will continue to do so. This is why letās stick to the main issue @Rosika is facing.
P.S. I am inclined to delete all the off-topic messages in the thread so that a few months later someone else jumps in and derail the main discussion of the web-stick problem. I hope you understand my point.
