I missed the part where you explain what the heck you meant.
Asserting opinions over and over again does little good without an explanation or question that the other person can understand. I'm trying to listen and learn what I might be missing. I cannot learn much when I can’t even understand the point.
Are you saying they did get your notes or that they did not get your notes?
They did not get my notes, that was the "no" I missed.
ahhhh. That was ambiguous. I see now. There is a problem only if the note on your own relay was not accessible to people on that relay. Is that the case? Or is it just that it is receiving less attention but perfectly accessible?
Also is the note a separate note with different meta information on it (like timestamps), or is it an exact copy/rebroadcast?
Dear gentleman, I wrote two big articles explaining my point and you answered with "this is wrong", I asked for clarification and you said "there is no issue" because "people would manage to get to the person they want to hear from", to which I replied that my example counters this with a fact: people wanted to hear from me but they were not hearing from me.
Now you must either say my fact assertion is wrong and why or you must rephrase your argument such that it is not invalidated my the fact I presented.
