Linux and Windows XP on the same PC 2945

Hmm .. depends what you call sanity. People who are sane enough to see the universe as it is are usually quite unhappy about at least some aspect of it all.

Possibly! It isn't one of the criteria that I apply. I simply don't (indeed can't) attempt to evaluate the effect of my response on the reader. For all I know he may be insulted by the word "and". OK, so there are generic things I could do to lessen the probability of him feeling attacked, but really, why bother? The fact is that I am NOT attacking him, and any attack that he perceives is in his own mind! Verbal threats and perceived threats are at the best of times subsbreastutes for physical violences in a fighting situation, and I am not fighting him in any sense that I can see. Threats can only have meaning when they may escalate into physical harm. Here they cannot do so. Hence there is no sense in a threat. Hence there is no possible sane perception of anything as a threat. Hence there is no need to respond to any perceived threat as such.

In other words, I don't feel a responsibility to look out to avoid triggering others fight-or-flight responses.

I didn't think they were typical - I thought they were rather expert. Indeed, rather too anally expert! He was looking ahead and his analysis was at least an analysis. I rather liked it. Where it went wrong was in his perceptions of relative dangers and difficulties. That's all he needed to correct - his judgment. He clearly has logical capabilities.

In the sense of not looking to buff up his ego, sure. I never do.

Peter