looks like we are in disagreement about this part.
> Apollo dev: How did you take that, sorry? Could you elaborate?
> spez: Oh, like, cause you were like "hey, if you want this, if you want this to go away, like [unintelligeble]..."
> Apollo dev: Oh, I said if you want Apollo to go quiet, like I would say it's quite loud in terms of its API use..."
> spez: Oh, okay, got it. Got it, sorry. That's a complete misinterpretation on my part. I apologize immediately [...]
Would you expect spez to still consider it a threat given both the literal content of what he says, and the tone it was said in? I see no way your interpretation makes sense.
Update on your updated comment: > and the tone it was said in? I see no way your interpretation makes sense.
Looks like we are again in disagreement about this.
sorry, this doesn't make sense to me.
I answered this already, it could be sugarcoating. Sorry, this discussion is low quality to my taste and I have no interest in continuing. Good bye.
its regular bs sugar coating, like you know someone is cheating, and he knows he is cheating but doesn't admit, but you don't have proof and you say "oh it was miscommunication" for the sake of continuing cooperation.