Hi Peter - On Thu, 31 Dec 2009, Peter Selinger wrote:
I just bounced the missing message to categories, using the original date (so it may drop down in your inbox depending on how you sort your mail).
now I'm baffled - I haven't received it in the folder where my cats mail gets filtered to, and it's not in the spam bucket. Both of the other messages have arrived fine for the second time - no idea what is wrong. If you try sending directly to me that might work out, sorry about this; will fwd the others now. best, Bob
Yes, "in defense of evil" is still the subject (I am using the American spelling). And yes, I meant hyperbole, thanks for pointing this out.
You know, for your convenience, I'll just bounce the other two (corrected) messages to you @ categories as well.
Thanks, -- Peter
Bob Rosebrugh wrote:
Hi Peter -
Unless I made a mistaken deletion, I didn't see this:
Subject: Re: categories: Re: Quantum computation and categories To: toby+categories@ugcs.caltech.edu Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2009 10:52:47 -0400 (AST) Cc: categories@mta.ca (categories)
Will forward when you resend, as well as the second and modified third - do you want to keep "in defence of evil" as subject. I also suspect you mean "hyperbole".
best, Bob On Thu, 31 Dec 2009, Peter Selinger wrote:
Bob Rosebrugh wrote:
Hi Peter,
No problem - I went to bed early last night :-)
I assume you do want me to post the first message?
ps - you referred to a third message, but I see only two? did one get lost?
Hi Bob,
I sent three messages to categories@mta.ca yesterday. They were:
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: categories: Re: Quantum computation and categories To: toby+categories@ugcs.caltech.edu Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2009 10:52:47 -0400 (AST) Cc: categories@mta.ca (categories)
Several people attempted to give a "non-evil" definition of a dagger category. Not much of this makes sense.
[snip] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: in defense of strictness To: categories@mta.ca (Categories List) Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2009 21:54:44 -0400 (AST)
Here is a bit of hyperbola. Hopefully entertaining.
[snip] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: in defense of evil To: Dusko.Pavlovic@comlab.ox.ac.uk Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2009 22:01:59 -0400 (AST) Cc: categories@mta.ca
Dear all,
I apologize for sending out a third (long) email about dagger [snip] ----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is this last one (to Dusko) that I wanted to suppress, or rather replace with the friendlier version.
It seems that you didn't receive one of the two others. Please let me know which one, and I'll resend it! -- Peter
I just re-sent it directly to you using two different methods. Let me know if you still don't receive it. It's too bad, because my message to Toby logically precedes my message to Dusko. Actually, since it will now be sent after the other one, perhaps I should re-write it so that it will be less repetitive. If you haven't sent it yet, that is. I generally hate it when people send multiple messages on the same subject on the same day, but somehow it made sense to break this into pieces. -- Peter Bob Rosebrugh wrote:
Hi Peter -
On Thu, 31 Dec 2009, Peter Selinger wrote:
I just bounced the missing message to categories, using the original date (so it may drop down in your inbox depending on how you sort your mail).
now I'm baffled - I haven't received it in the folder where my cats mail gets filtered to, and it's not in the spam bucket. Both of the other messages have arrived fine for the second time - no idea what is wrong. If you try sending directly to me that might work out, sorry about this; will fwd the others now.
best, Bob
Yes, "in defense of evil" is still the subject (I am using the American spelling). And yes, I meant hyperbole, thanks for pointing this out.
You know, for your convenience, I'll just bounce the other two (corrected) messages to you @ categories as well.
Thanks, -- Peter
Bob Rosebrugh wrote:
Hi Peter -
Unless I made a mistaken deletion, I didn't see this:
Subject: Re: categories: Re: Quantum computation and categories To: toby+categories@ugcs.caltech.edu Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2009 10:52:47 -0400 (AST) Cc: categories@mta.ca (categories)
Will forward when you resend, as well as the second and modified third - do you want to keep "in defence of evil" as subject. I also suspect you mean "hyperbole".
best, Bob On Thu, 31 Dec 2009, Peter Selinger wrote:
Bob Rosebrugh wrote:
Hi Peter,
No problem - I went to bed early last night :-)
I assume you do want me to post the first message?
ps - you referred to a third message, but I see only two? did one get lost?
Hi Bob,
I sent three messages to categories@mta.ca yesterday. They were:
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: categories: Re: Quantum computation and categories To: toby+categories@ugcs.caltech.edu Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2009 10:52:47 -0400 (AST) Cc: categories@mta.ca (categories)
Several people attempted to give a "non-evil" definition of a dagger category. Not much of this makes sense.
[snip] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: in defense of strictness To: categories@mta.ca (Categories List) Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2009 21:54:44 -0400 (AST)
Here is a bit of hyperbola. Hopefully entertaining.
[snip] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: in defense of evil To: Dusko.Pavlovic@comlab.ox.ac.uk Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2009 22:01:59 -0400 (AST) Cc: categories@mta.ca
Dear all,
I apologize for sending out a third (long) email about dagger [snip] ----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is this last one (to Dusko) that I wanted to suppress, or rather replace with the friendlier version.
It seems that you didn't receive one of the two others. Please let me know which one, and I'll resend it! -- Peter
participants (2)
-
Bob Rosebrugh -
selinger