A bit of a surprise

[Sumpter250]

I just read Hminky's replies in the Narrow gauge Logging and Mining forum, about scale 55. Combined with the tone of his replies, and the phrase in his signature, I felt it was necessary to PM him. I sent him this:
Harold,
I understand your "disagreements" with On30. I've followed your work and admire it to the point of going back to your posts for inspiration.
In my ship model work, I have been known to splice an eye in fly tying thread, when using it for running rigging.
I try not to make it sound like I demand that others do the same.........."stinkin' letters" sounds to me like a demand, so I'm asking you to please remove that comment from your signature. Replace it with something a bit more positive. The play on the movie line has its place, and can be funny, but its use can also be confrontational.
In your signature it comes across as confrontational, and just doesn't seem appropriate for a modeler of your experience and skill, and doesn't send a very friendly message. Thanks in advance,
Pete

If this is an over reaction......sorry. I just haven't known Harold to be quite so ready to ......"insist". He usually is a far better teacher than that.

[eightyeightfan1]

Remind me not to get you mad.

[MasonJar]

I did not notice the signature part, but did think that the exchange was overly confrontational for Harold. He's normally more like "here's what I did, and thanks for visiting my web site if you do".

One to keep an eye on. Thanks Pete for taking the initiative.

Andrew

[ezdays]

I think he means "no stinkin' letters" in the scale description, not that he doesn't want to get any "stinkin' letters". Like, calling On3 just, "3". I think he was trying to be funny-sarcastic. Is that what you thought, or am I reading you wrong? It is a confusing statement though. :?

[Ralph]

I read the signature line that way too but the thing that surprised me was the "Sorry your thought box is so limited' remark to NKP174. That's rude. It doesn't sound like his usual way of posting.

Ralph

[Brakie]

I am not to sure what to make of it since there was no real problems and nobody(yet) has took it personal and I am doubting they will...However,I agree with Don.

Some times it might be better if moderators was mind readers.

[Sumpter250]

This is the PM I sent in reply to his PM to me. I quoted the important part of his PM:

My point is I don't want any letter, that is why it is "Scale 55". If you consider that confrontationl, then goodbye.

"Scale 55 - We Don't need no stinkin' letter"
Harold

Harold,
I do not consider "Scale55" confrontational, just "stinkin'".
"Scale55- We don't need a letter", would make your point clearly, and would be perceived as less angry to those who prefer letters. I really do not want to see you leave. You have contributed too much quality work and guidance, and besides, a point, made quietly often has greater impact than one stated boldly. It is seen as a light in the dark, rather than a command.
Pete

His PM, removed any doubt that I had misread his intention. If he refuses to change the signature, I would appreciate any suggestion on how to procede. It isn't something that demands harsh action. I just thought he would be more....reasonable..., and soften his signature statement.

"Remind me not to get you mad."
"Don't make me angry, you won't like me angry"........Is that why my name shows up "green"?

[doctorwayne]

Yeah, I agree with Don's interpretation, although Harold does seem to be getting a bit feisty. Michael, at least, doesn't seem upset by the "limited thought box" comment.

Wayne

[Sumpter250]

I think he means "no stinkin' letters" in the scale description, not that he doesn't want to get any "stinkin' letters". Like, calling On3 just, "3". I think he was trying to be funny-sarcastic. Is that what you thought, or am I reading you wrong? It is a confusing statement though. :?

Don, his comments had edge to them. Had he not seemed so......defensive..of his position, the "movie line" reference in his signature would have been funny. It struck me as " in your face, so there! ". More specifically, the whole thing seemed out of character. Maybe he hasn't had enough Scotch lately.

Or:......Maybe I haven't had enough Scotch lately.

[tompm]

Reading his post I keep thinking it is a play on

"Badges!, we don't need no stinkin' badges!"

In that context it is harmless to me.

[ezdays]

Reading his post I keep thinking it is a play on

"Badges!, we don't need no stinkin' badges!"

In that context it is harmless to me.

That is the context that I've heard this used before. Kind of in your face, but really more of a joke than anything.

[Ralph]

I think I'd leave it be, Pete. I get the impression that this is all some sort of misunderstanding that won't get better with insistent requests to change signatures. This might be one of those times when our inability to hear voice tones and see facial expressions gets in the way of communication. My guess is that if you had the chance to share a glass of single malt with Harold in person he'd make more sense.

Ralph

[TrainNut]

Yes, and, if you look at his stinking profile, he doesn't even have a stinking automatic repeating signature.

[eightyeightfan1]

I'm surprised Mountain Man hasn't grabbed a hold of that one.
Maybe he's learned his lesson. His last few posts have seemed that way.

[Sumpter250]

Yes, and, if you look at his stinking profile, he doesn't even have a stinking automatic repeating signature.

Yeah, I noticed that after the fact........but he had been repeating it

I don't see any of the reactive sniping I was expecting to see, so I'll let it be.
I'm sending Harold one more PM to let him know that, and that I may have reacted where no reaction was called for.