Tomato, tomato, potato, potato?
Glenn Fleishman
SWEARS her friend Jeff was actually THERE when this happened. Later, I
heard the same story taking place in a slightly different set of
circumstances on the east coast from a different set of people.
Here it is:
"This guy shows up for a musical theater audition without any music,
so they give him a standard piece to perform. He gets up, and starts
singing, (phonetic spelling added)
'You say poe-tay-to and I say poe-tay-to,
You say toe-may-to and I say toe-may-to,
Poe-tay-to, poe-tay-to...
What's this song all about anyway?!'
Now my officemate huffily denied that her friend could have misled her
as to being there, but hearing the identical story of course makes one
suspicious unless her friend a) wrote the story up in a national
publication; b) has friends in common (or some chain of them) with the
people I knew out east. However, I doubt it.
Anyone else heard this one or variations? Sources (or dates) would be
useful so I can prove to this person that her friend probably said, "I
know someone who was there," rather than, "I was there." (Her friend
has moved, otherwise I'd quiz him.)
Glenn Fleishman
Seattle, Washington
Shabby Doll
: "This guy shows up for a musical theater audition without any music,
: singing, (phonetic spelling added)
: 'You say poe-tay-to and I say poe-tay-to,
: You say toe-may-to and I say toe-may-to,
: Poe-tay-to, poe-tay-to...
: What's this song all about anyway?!'
: Anyone else heard this one or variations? Sources (or dates) would be
: useful so I can prove to this person that her friend probably said, "I
: know someone who was there," rather than, "I was there." (Her friend
: has moved, otherwise I'd quiz him.)
Well, Glenn, this is one of my favorite stories. My sophomore year
English teacher told it to our class about, I guess it would be seven
years ago now. I went to a suburban Chicago high school, and he said it
happened to one of his friends in the city. (minus the "What's this song
all about anyway" - the way he told it the woman was completely oblivious
and only found out after how wrong she was)
Never even suspected it could have been a UL, mostly because I loved and
cherished my English teacher. Ah well. Early-onset cynicism.
Pam "good thing it wasn't 'La Vie en Rose'" Wesely
______________________________________________________________________________
The big top is deserted now Pam Wesely
And the circus girl rehearses
She knows how to turn their heads
And not fall between two horses. (EC) pwe...@minerva.cis.yale.edu
When I said I was lying, I might have been lying.
______________________________________________________________________________
Colin Fine
writes
>Here's one for the group. I heard this story from an officemate who
>SWEARS her friend Jeff was actually THERE when this happened. Later, I
>heard the same story taking place in a slightly different set of
>circumstances on the east coast from a different set of people.
>
>Here it is:
>
>so they give him a standard piece to perform. He gets up, and starts
>singing, (phonetic spelling added)
>
>'You say poe-tay-to and I say poe-tay-to,
> You say toe-may-to and I say toe-may-to,
> Poe-tay-to, poe-tay-to...
> What's this song all about anyway?!'
>
>as to being there, but hearing the identical story of course makes one
>suspicious unless her friend a) wrote the story up in a national
>publication; b) has friends in common (or some chain of them) with the
>people I knew out east. However, I doubt it.
>
>useful so I can prove to this person that her friend probably said, "I
>know someone who was there," rather than, "I was there." (Her friend
>has moved, otherwise I'd quiz him.)
>
>Seattle, Washington
I saw this in a sketch on Television many years ago. I think it was John
Fortune auditioning, though it could have been John Bird; I think it was
in one of the Monty Python etc benefits for Amnesty or some such - The
Secret Policeman's Ball etc, which I guess would put it late 70's; but
many of the sketches in those were recycled, so it was probably older.
The punch line was a more British
"You know, I don't think I'm quite getting this."
Colin
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
| Colin Fine 33 Pemberton Drive, Bradford, W Yorks. BD7 1RA, UK |
| Tel: 01274 733680 e-mail: co...@kindness.demon.co.uk |
| God gave me eyes so that I could see you, |
| and gave you eyes so that I could see myself" -K.B.Brown|
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Turnpike evaluation. For Turnpike information, mailto:in...@turnpike.com
JoAnne Schmitz
>'You say poe-tay-to and I say poe-tay-to,
> You say toe-may-to and I say toe-may-to,
> Poe-tay-to, poe-tay-to...
Years ago (more than five, at least), I heard this as a joke. It
stars a young lady with a pronounced Brooklyn accent as the singer,
and the casting director cuts her off before she ever says "what's
this song all about anyway." I believe it's been used in a movie.
But -- you missed the punch line!
The director says, "Thank you, that'll be all, Miss Levine." (he
pronounces it luh-VEEN).
Insulted, she says, "That's Le-VIYNE."
JoAnne "so long as you spell my name right" Schmitz
-----------------------------------------------------------
There are emergency contraception pills that you can take
after you have had unprotected sex. They work up to three
days after intercourse. You don't have to wait to be sure
you're pregnant and then have an abortion.
For more information you can call 1-800-584-9911. Or check
the web site http://opr.princeton.edu/ec/ec.html.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Glenn Fleishman
> Never even suspected it could have been a UL, mostly because I loved and
> cherished my English teacher. Ah well. Early-onset cynicism.
Yes, it always bums me out when I find out that a story I associate with
a person (in this case, the friend of my colleague) is suddenly turned
into background radiation.
On the other hand, it's a nice testament to modern life that we are
still storytellers despite all efforts to make us consumer buying units.
Thanks for the references! My somewhat supercilious colleague -- "My
friend was there and heard this!" -- gets her comeupance.
Glenn
Brian Jones
> 'You say poe-tay-to and I say poe-tay-to,
> You say toe-may-to and I say toe-may-to,
> Poe-tay-to, poe-tay-to...
> What's this song all about anyway?!'
Wasn't this used in the Mel Brooks 1983 starring vehicle "To Be Or Not To
Be"? (remake of Ernst Lubitsch's 1942 classic starring Jack Benny). Except
it wasn't an audition, it was performed before an audience.
Brian "Ich bin ein Lubitscher" Jones
You suffer in the gloom of the sickroom | Brian...@ajc.com
And talk to yourself until you die. | My opinions suck in a
- Pink Floyd | different way than those
"Free Four" | of my employer.
Charles Wm. Dimmick
>
> > He gets up, and starts
> >singing, (phonetic spelling added)
> "You know, I don't think I'm quite getting this."
This was done as a skit at a church social in Cheshire, Connecticut in
the spring of 1974. The "singer" was a member of our church who used to
be kidded about his pronounced British accent, so naturally he sang as
follows"
"You say po-tah'-to, and I say po-tah'-to,
You say to-mah'-to, and I say to-mah'-to,"
etc.
The punch line was ALSO quite British.
I got the impression that this was being recycled from an earlier source
at the time.
Charles Wm. Dimmick
Jeffrey Davis
> > Poe-tay-to, poe-tay-to...
> > What's this song all about anyway?!'
>
> Wasn't this used in the Mel Brooks 1983 starring vehicle "To Be Or Not To
> Be"? (remake of Ernst Lubitsch's 1942 classic starring Jack Benny). Except
> it wasn't an audition, it was performed before an audience.
Ira Gershwin apparently baffled a lot of people. A British music
publisher is said to have corrected the title of "S'Wonderful" to
"It's Wonderful."
--
Jeffrey Davis <da...@ca.uky.edu> It's 1927 and the goose is hanging high.
Craig Myers
>>singing, (phonetic spelling added)
>>
>>'You say poe-tay-to and I say poe-tay-to,
>> You say toe-may-to and I say toe-may-to,
>> Poe-tay-to, poe-tay-to...
>> What's this song all about anyway?!'
>>
>>Anyone else heard this one or variations? Sources (or dates) would be
>>useful so I can prove to this person that her friend probably said, "I
>>know someone who was there," rather than, "I was there."
Very interesting; I went to a performance of the Turtle Creek Chorale
(a men's chorus) here in Dallas, Texas on (looking at calender) March
20 [I think] of this year. Michael Feinstein was the featured
singer/pianist, and the evening's music was that of the Gershwins',
Ira and George.
Mr. Feinstein was Ira Gershwin's personal assistant for a number (20?)
of years before he (Ira) passed away. He told a variation of the
above, saying that it was IG's favorite joke (unfortunately, I don't
recall getting a feeling of whether it was assumed to be true, or a
true joke). Except in this version, after a woman came on and sang
the potato/tomato lines, and pronouncing them the same, the auditoner
(director?) interrupted her and said "That's enough, Miss Weinstein
("Wine-steen"), thank you. We'll call you." to which Miss Weinstein
responded harshly "It's Weinstein! ("Wine-stine" - long "i")".
HTH.
Craig "Whew! That Ira was quite the humorist!" Myers
Bill Welch
<dim...@ccsu.ctstateu.edu> writes
>This was done as a skit at a church social in Cheshire, Connecticut in
>the spring of 1974. The "singer" was a member of our church who used to
>be kidded about his pronounced British accent, so naturally he sang as
>follows"
> "You say po-tah'-to, and I say po-tah'-to,
> You say to-mah'-to, and I say to-mah'-to,"
> etc.
If his accent was British, he would have said "po-tay-to" and "to-mah-
to."
--
Large jazzman nullifies Bill Welch's curiously-zoned kettle!
John Schmitt
JoAnne Schmitz wrote:
[snippage involving ?Noel Coward song]
Wasn't it Dan Quayle? potato,potatoe,let's call the whole thing off.
--
John Schmitt
Disclaimers Apply.
An Englishman in New York? No, an American in London.
Leonard Blanks
>I saw this in a sketch on Television many years ago. I think it was John
>Fortune auditioning, though it could have been John Bird; I think it was
>in one of the Monty Python etc benefits for Amnesty or some such - The
>Secret Policeman's Ball etc, which I guess would put it late 70's; but
>many of the sketches in those were recycled, so it was probably older.
>The punch line was a more British
>"You know, I don't think I'm quite getting this."
It was the late, great Peter Cook.
Len
--
Leonard Blanks l...@haruspex.demon.co.uk
PGP Public Key Available Send mail with Subject: SEND-PGP-KEY
Key fingerprint = E6 B4 27 35 FA 1C 70 74 C1 19 EA C2 51 C8 42 D2
Lucy R F
see what's wrong with this relationship'.
Paul Roub
: > Poe-tay-to, poe-tay-to...
: > What's this song all about anyway?!'
: I saw this in a sketch on Television many years ago. I think it was John
: Fortune auditioning, though it could have been John Bird; I think it was
: in one of the Monty Python etc benefits for Amnesty or some such - The
: Secret Policeman's Ball etc, which I guess would put it late 70's; but
: many of the sketches in those were recycled, so it was probably older.
Check out "Dead Parrot's Society", which is, I believe, from one of the
Secret Policeman's Balls. It's a compilation of various bits from Peter
Cook, John Cleese, et al.
The bit in question is courtesy of Peter Cook on this tape, if memory
serves. The punchline, paraphrased, is "I really don't see what's the
problem with this relationship."
-paul
// Internet Pornography Debate Resolved:
// http://www.shadow.net/~proub/porno.html
Kevin D. Quitt
the first two lines and declare what a dumb song it was.
--
#include <standard_disclaimer.h> http://emoryi.jpl.nasa.gov/
_
Kevin D Quitt USA 91351-4454 96.37% of all statistics are made up
David Johns
#>>so they give him a standard piece to perform. He gets up, and starts
#>>singing, (phonetic spelling added)
#>>
#>>'You say poe-tay-to and I say poe-tay-to,
#>> You say toe-may-to and I say toe-may-to,
#>> Poe-tay-to, poe-tay-to...
#>> What's this song all about anyway?!'
#>>
#[...]
#>>Anyone else heard this one or variations? Sources (or dates) would be
#>>useful so I can prove to this person that her friend probably said, "I
#>>know someone who was there," rather than, "I was there."
it's a monty python sketch. not from a tv show, from a movie of sketches,
maybe leftovers or something. mid 70s.
Paul Curnow and Wendy O'Boyle
In <4lgsaq$5...@swsu65.swmed.edu> cmy...@mednet.swmed.edu (Craig Myers)
writes:
>>>"This guy shows up for a musical theater audition without any music,
>>>
>>>'You say poe-tay-to and I say poe-tay-to,
>>> What's this song all about anyway?!'
>>>
>>>Anyone else heard this one or variations? Sources (or dates) would
>>>said, "I know someone who was there," rather than, "I was there."
It's a sketch from "The Secret Policeman's Private Parts" a predecessor
to Live Aid for Amnesty International in the late 70's, by bits and
pieces of Monty Python, Rowan Atkinson, Pete Townshend and various
other peoples, the sequal to "The Secret Policeman's Other Ball", much
harder to find
And I was there - right in the middle of Blockbuster Video, and
directly in front of my VCR.
Nicole A. Okun
In article <4lminj$c...@bill.gnatnet.net>, djo...@gnatnet.net (David Johns)
writes:
>
>
> #[...]
> #>>Anyone else heard this one or variations? Sources (or dates) would be
> #>>useful so I can prove to this person that her friend probably said, "I
> #>>know someone who was there," rather than, "I was there."
>
> it's a monty python sketch. not from a tv show, from a movie of
> sketches,
> maybe leftovers or something. mid 70s.
>
No, it's an Elaine May - Mike Nichols sketch -- can't tell you the date,
but it turns up occasionally on a radio program called "The Royal Canadian
Airfarce" on the CBC when the Farce is on summer vacation and substituting
classic comedy recordings for their usual stuff.
I've not seen Monty Python doing this; I think they only did original
material. The Nichols and May sketch would be from the late fifties or
early sixties, I think.
-- Nicole (inclined to say "toe-MAY-toe" but I don't pronounce "roof" to
rhyme with "whuff", and just ask me to say "house")
Kevin D. Quitt
On Thu, 25 Apr 1996 01:57:02 GMT, djo...@gnatnet.net (David Johns) wrote:
>it's a monty python sketch. not from a tv show, from a movie of sketches,
>maybe leftovers or something. mid 70s.
It's also a tad older. mid 40's.
Phil Edwards
Kevin D. Quitt wrote:
>
>
> It's also a tad older. mid 40's.
>
Yup - I always thought it was Cole Porter (although just writing the name
makes me realise it's way below *his* standard... but I digress)
Could I just point out that no one in Britain (no one in the
English-speaking world AFAIK) has *ever* said "po-tah-to"?
--
Phil Edwards new...@dircon.co.uk
"We mere mortals will take care of the necessary cutlery distortion"
Jeffrey Davis
Phil Edwards wrote:
> Kevin D. Quitt wrote:
> >
> > It's also a tad older. mid 40's.
> >
> Yup - I always thought it was Cole Porter (although just writing the name
S'Wonderful of you to say that.
Mike Holmans
Phil Edwards asserted:
> Could I just point out that no one in Britain (no one in the
> English-speaking world AFAIK) has *ever* said "po-tah-to"?
This assertion is no longer true. I just did, and I'm in London.
Mike "though what I meant by it is anyone's guess" Holmans
Patrick
In article <4md29l$q...@netnews.upenn.edu>,
wee...@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener) wrote:
>In article <3187A9...@dircon.co.uk>, Phil Edwards <news-uk@dircon writes:
>>Could I just point out that no one in Britain (no one in the
>>English-speaking world AFAIK) has *ever* said "po-tah-to"?
>
>this *unscientific* claim when he has not--gosh--personally listened
>to every last Brit or English speaker pronouncing "potato"?
Because we were waiting for you.
Patrick "Like duh" Fine
Matthew P Wiener
In article <3187A9...@dircon.co.uk>, Phil Edwards <news-uk@dircon writes:
>Could I just point out that no one in Britain (no one in the
>English-speaking world AFAIK) has *ever* said "po-tah-to"?
So. Where is the nobrain rush to flame Phil Edwards for asserting
this *unscientific* claim when he has not--gosh--personally listened
to every last Brit or English speaker pronouncing "potato"?
--
-Matthew P Wiener (wee...@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu)
Matthew P Wiener
In article <4mepc6$d...@nnrp1.news.primenet.com>, imfine@primenet (Patrick) writes:
>In article <4md29l$q...@netnews.upenn.edu>,
> wee...@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener) wrote:
>>>Could I just point out that no one in Britain (no one in the
>>>English-speaking world AFAIK) has *ever* said "po-tah-to"?
>>So. Where is the nobrain rush to flame Phil Edwards for asserting
>>this *unscientific* claim when he has not--gosh--personally listened
>>to every last Brit or English speaker pronouncing "potato"?
>Because we were waiting for you.
So rush in already.
>Patrick "Like duh" Fine
Ah. You know the words, but you don't know the music.
JoAnne Schmitz
wee...@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener) wrote:
>In article <3187A9...@dircon.co.uk>, Phil Edwards <news-uk@dircon writes:
>>Could I just point out that no one in Britain (no one in the
>>English-speaking world AFAIK) has *ever* said "po-tah-to"?
>So. Where is the nobrain rush to flame Phil Edwards for asserting
>this *unscientific* claim when he has not--gosh--personally listened
>to every last Brit or English speaker pronouncing "potato"?
1. It wasn't a key part of the legend.
2. Someone provided the counterexample anyway.
JoAnne "you're welcome" Schmitz
Matthew P Wiener
In article <4mmimq$o...@news2.cais.com>, jschmitz@qis (JoAnne Schmitz) writes:
>wee...@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener) wrote:
>
>>In article <3187A9...@dircon.co.uk>, Phil Edwards <news-uk@dircon writes:
>>>Could I just point out that no one in Britain (no one in the
>>>English-speaking world AFAIK) has *ever* said "po-tah-to"?
>>So. Where is the nobrain rush to flame Phil Edwards for asserting
>>this *unscientific* claim when he has not--gosh--personally listened
>>to every last Brit or English speaker pronouncing "potato"?
>1. It wasn't a key part of the legend.
Why does it have to be before the nobrain rush begins?
>2. Someone provided the counterexample anyway.
So what? Why was the claim to mispronounce the word not accompanied by
flames and criticism that Phil Edwards was being *unscientific* for
asserting such without personally listening to every last Brit or
English speaker first?
That was my question--you have not addressed it.
Angus Johnston
In article <4mnnk2$p...@netnews.upenn.edu>
wee...@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener) writes:
> >2. Someone provided the counterexample anyway.
>
> So what?
So Edwards' inanity was challenged, just as yours was, even though his
differed from yours in that it wasn't used as support for a supposedly
serious argument.
> Why was the claim to mispronounce the word not accompanied by
> flames and criticism that Phil Edwards was being *unscientific* for
> asserting such without personally listening to every last Brit or
> English speaker first?
Edwards hadn't previously demonstrated that he was an obnoxious
asshole.
Like, duh, retard.
--
Angus Johnston
http://www.panix.com/~angusj
Jason R. Heimbaugh
Matthew P Wiener <wee...@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu> wrote:
>So what? Why was the claim to mispronounce the word not accompanied by
>flames and criticism that Phil Edwards was being *unscientific* for
>asserting such without personally listening to every last Brit or
>English speaker first?
Because we knew it would annoy you more not to. Annoying little pricks like
you who get their panties in a wad tend to die from stress related diseases
and that seems to be the only way we can get you to fuck off. Anything that
will make that occur faster is a Good Thing.
--
Jason R. Heimbaugh - ja...@heimbaugh.com
Matthew P Wiener
In article <4mnvtc$9...@news1.panix.com>, angusj@panix (Angus Johnston) writes:
>In article <4mnnk2$p...@netnews.upenn.edu>
>wee...@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener) writes:
>> >2. Someone provided the counterexample anyway.
>> So what?
>So Edwards' inanity was challenged, just as yours was, even though his
>differed from yours in that it wasn't used as support for a supposedly
>serious argument.
It was challenged yes. It was not accompanied by rank retarded comments
about "folklore is a science" and assertions that every last example of
any phenomenon is behind any and all "scientific claims".
Why does it being central support make a difference?
>> Why was the claim to mispronounce the word not accompanied by
>> flames and criticism that Phil Edwards was being *unscientific* for
>> asserting such without personally listening to every last Brit or
>> English speaker first?
>Edwards hadn't previously demonstrated that he was an obnoxious
>asshole.
Eh? Why would that allegation inspire anyone to come up with such
maggotbrained ideas of the above sort?
>Like, duh, retard.
You didn't answer the question. Duh squared.
Matthew P Wiener
In article <4mnsoi$o...@shellx.best.com>, jason@heimbaugh (Jason R. Heimbaugh) writes:
>Matthew P Wiener <wee...@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu> wrote:
>>So what? Why was the claim to mispronounce the word not accompanied by
>>flames and criticism that Phil Edwards was being *unscientific* for
>>asserting such without personally listening to every last Brit or
>>English speaker first?
>Because we knew it would annoy you more not to. Annoying little
>pricks like you who get their panties in a wad tend to die from
>stress related diseases and that seems to be the only way we can [...]
Golly. Sure sounds retarded. Got it in one!
Emily Kelly
JoAnne Schmitz <jsch...@qis.net> wrote:
:wee...@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener) wrote:
:
:>Phil Edwards <news-uk@dircon writes:
:>>Could I just point out that no one in Britain (no one in the
:>>English-speaking world AFAIK) has *ever* said "po-tah-to"?
:
:>So. Where is the nobrain rush to flame Phil Edwards for asserting
:>this *unscientific* claim when he has not--gosh--personally listened
:
:1. It wasn't a key part of the legend.
:2. Someone provided the counterexample anyway.
Besides which, we were able to extrapolate supporting evidence from our
vast databank of examples of "buffet" pronunciation.
Emily "poTAHtoes aw GROTten are Umbly presented on the Buffett" Kelly
--
Emily Harrison Kelly "Deer-whistles are *so* overrated."
eke...@acpub.duke.edu --Will Wheeler
For the AFU FAQ: email mail-...@rtfm.mit.edu, no subject, with the message,
"send usenet/news.answers/folklore-faq/*".
Harry MF Teasley
Matthew P Wiener bequeathed:
> So what? Why was the claim to mispronounce the word not accompanied by
> flames and criticism that Phil Edwards was being *unscientific* for
> English speaker first?
Matthew, stop being such a maggot-brained pissant foul-smelling cranky
fucked-up weasel-word-talking moronic asshole shit-for-brains poncy
danglesocket wannabe know-nothing painful-rectal-itch-of-a-person asswipe
snot-sucking gaping-wound-where-the-brain-should-be trying annoying sickly
childish fuckwit dipshit knock-kneed piggy shit-spewing hate-filled
needle-dick trash-talking ill-conceived personality-transplant-needing
pinheaded sack-of-pus urinal-breath dingleberry incognizant lame-ass
breathable-air-wasting meat-by-product horse-faced decaf-drinking
thumb-sucking no-date shivelled-spirit loser hose-bag bitch-talking
crybaby craven toejam no-sense-of-humor prick cause-having no-sense
unworthy laborious bet-you-think-I-can't-keep-this-up-bet-I-can facile
reprobate ungraceful slackbladder clue-repellent just-plain-repellent
momma's-boy wailing sniggeringly-inept uncreative immature lackluster
beneath-contempt piss-poor mild-geek-by-day-but-fucking-offal-eating-
shithead-by-night wormy crass no-excuse unclear-on-the-concept
attention-craving net-loon drive-by-shooting-candidate freakish stupid
lying shitty snivelling no-class lower-than-dirt illiterate unprofessional
pico-dick-nonpareil inadequate laughable inept uncultured repugnant prig
goober earwig flaccid zero-friends did-you-ever-finish-that-degree-
at-Berkley-or-are-your-pompous-posts-your-way-of-trying-to-deal-with-your-
failures-as-a-real- mathematician grunting nakedly-juvenile-to-the-core
embarrassing masochistic goose-egg-IQ hellspawn inarticulate flailing
funkless dolt creepy monstrous socially-clumsy dog-kibble noxious
atrophied-neuron irredeemable posting-recklessly-while-under-the-
delusion-you-can-actually-think truculent mycogenous goony
spittle-spraying one-track-minded nebbish hopelessly-outclassed pofaced
amoral toadlike craptrap buttinski loopy spoiled-brat idiotic
you-should-eat-more-because-it's-obvious-your-body-is-scavenging-
your-grey-matter-for-nourishment boorish whiny unsound capable-of-
sucking-ambient-humor-from-the-very-air atrocious imbecilic wanker
impotent malodorous dismissable boring incapable callous mean-spirited
snippy piece-of-dung evil nerdy almost-not-worth-this-but-
I-gotta-say-you're-a-fun-target pre-pubescent cheesy monosyllabic
safe-and-effective-diuretic rank-smelling fetid ditchwater peculiar
thick-skulled troglodyte wheedling monkey-boy pukestain inbred
flirting-with-intelligence-but-getting-the-cold-shoulder-in-return
distressing Air-Supply-listening scrotum-sniffing illkempt weedy
figment-of-Satan's-imagination bottom-feeding cromagnon pasty-faced
Don-of-the-Moron-Mafia colostomy-brain pathetic nipple-biter noisome
irrelevant be-sure-to-say-"when" deportee-from-the-Land-of-Good-Taste
bile-inducing ridiculous feverish malignant feeble nauseating dribbly
schmuck blisteringly-dull brane-challenged etiquette-impaired
mouth-breathing intellectual-pea lard-butt unremarkable dozen-word-
vocabulary amateurish King-of-Denial weenerbrane useless trivial
sleep-inducing nightmarish disagreeable snotty prize-winning-jerk limp
illogical uncouth piddling blue-ribbon-scumbag negligible insulting
unreasonable pablum-puking strange little putz. Go home.
Harry "feel free to not come back" Teasley
--
"there are two types of people in the world: those who answer 'two-fifty'
to that question, and those who do not."
Phil Edwards
Patrick wrote:
>
> In article <4mnnk2$p...@netnews.upenn.edu>,
> writes:
> >>>>Could I just point out that no one in Britain (no one in the
> >>>>English-speaking world AFAIK) has *ever* said "po-tah-to"?
> >
Could I just point out that this is the first time that a posting of mine
has been the cause of someone roundly abusing several other people for
*not* having flamed me - without (on the other hand) expressing any
objection to the content of the original, completely flippant,
low-UL-relevance, not-even-all-that-funny, mark-it-as-read-and-forget-it
posting?
Gosh. They're fighting over me!
--
Phil "Or you could just add another AFAIK" Edwards
James Linn
In article <4mpj1c$c...@panix2.panix.com>, he...@panix.com (Harry MF
Teasley) wrote:
>
> Matthew, stop being such a maggot-brained pissant foul-smelling cranky
> fucked-up weasel-word-talking moronic asshole shit-for-brains poncy
> danglesocket wannabe know-nothing painful-rectal-itch-of-a-person asswipe
> snot-sucking gaping-wound-where-the-brain-should-be trying annoying sickly
> childish fuckwit dipshit knock-kneed piggy shit-spewing hate-filled
> needle-dick trash-talking ill-conceived personality-transplant-needing
Harry,
I've studied it in detail and looked at it from every angle, but I can't
for the life of me figure out why you submitted this in the longest
paillindrome thread. While your submission's literary merit is not at
issue, it fails to meet the requirements of the pallindrome contest.
Wait a minute.....Oh sorry I forgot to check the header, never mind.
Too bad. It would have made an impressive addition to the FAQ.
James "improving my vocabulary through word power" Linn
My opinions are MINE,MINE,MINE!!!
Matthew P Wiener
In article <4mpj1c$c...@panix2.panix.com>, het3@panix (Harry MF Teasley) writes:
>Matthew P Wiener bequeathed:
>> So what? Why was the claim to mispronounce the word not accompanied by
>> flames and criticism that Phil Edwards was being *unscientific* for
>> asserting such without personally listening to every last Brit or
>> English speaker first?
>Matthew, stop being such a maggot-brained pissant foul-smelling cranky
...
Such a crybaby.
People insulted me, I insulted them back. Deal with it, retard.
Brian Jones
In article <4mqskg$g...@netnews.upenn.edu>, wee...@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu
(Matthew P Wiener) wrote:
> People insulted me, I insulted them back. Deal with it, retard.
All together now...
Everybody ready?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
"Like, *plonk*, retard."
Brian "Harry, you misplet 'clue-retardant'" Jones
--
The Sons of Confederate Veterans now make a compelling argument when
they state that we should love their flag because of the gallantry of
many soldiers of the Confederacy. Why were they silent during the
years their flag's image was being stolen by the KKK and others?
Mike D'Angelo
Matthew P Wiener (wee...@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu) wrote:
: That was my question--you have not addressed it.
Several people have now answered your question, which, in a nutshell,
amounts to "how come you didn't pick on Phil Edwards, when he made the
same mistake for which I was raked over the coals?" The answer, provided
succinctly by Angus Johnston and Jason Heimbaugh, and in expanded form by
Harry Teasley, is that we like Phil, and we loathe you.
Mike "oh...was that not the answer you wanted?" D'Angelo
Matthew P Wiener
In article <4mrlv7$f...@news.duke.edu>, ekelly@acpub (Emily Kelly) writes:
>Matthew P Wiener <wee...@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu> astutely observes:
>>In article <4mougi$7...@news.duke.edu>, ekelly@acpub (Emily Kelly) writes:
>>>Besides which, we were able to extrapolate supporting evidence from our
>>>vast databank of examples of "buffet" pronunciation.
>>You didn't answer the question.
>Like, duh, rallantando. Do I get extra points because I wasn't trying to?
No.
Matthew P Wiener
In article <4mrvm8$n...@news.nyu.edu>, mqd8478@is2 (Mike D'Angelo) writes:
>Matthew P Wiener (wee...@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu) wrote:
>: That was my question--you have not addressed it.
>Several people have now answered your question, which, in a nutshell,
>amounts to "how come you didn't pick on Phil Edwards, when he made the
>same mistake for which I was raked over the coals?" The answer, provided
>succinctly by Angus Johnston and Jason Heimbaugh, and in expanded form by
>Harry Teasley, is that we like Phil, and we loathe you.
No, that was not my question, and they have not answered it yet. You see,
I don't care about flames or your lack of friendship either way. I mean,
go for it. Like, woo. Xenopsylla cheopis rules forever. Nit nit nit.
What I am asking about is why were the response so *maggotbrained* to
begin with. Utter, total mumpsimus. Duh exponential.
For example, the counterexample provided to Phil, while friendly, was in
fact a counterexample (presumably of the doesn't count variety). It would
have remained a counterexample had it been presented rudely.
He could have also received a response like "begging your pardon, Master
Phil, but you haven't apparently verified every last instance of people
saying `potato', and I'm sorry to say that's just not scientific of you,
and here in folklore we believe in being scientific about these matters."
Very polite, yes, but deepdoo maggotbrained retarded.
Now, someone could have refuted my remarks by saying, "what a bunch of
bleepbleepbleep, you doopdoopdoop, over in France they tell the story
about how the English parliament accidently set pi to 3.4 as part of
the conversion to decimal pence, ayuck yuck yuck". _That_ would have
been intelligent, with or without xenograft rejection. No such luck.
So, why the maggotbrained responses? As distinct from the hostility.
Matthew P Wiener
In article <319282...@dircon.co.uk>, Phil Edwards <news-uk@dircon writes:
>Now, this looks like a potentially interesting discussion, which could
>result in an approach to evaluating postings simultaneously along
>"polite/rude", "intelligent/crass" and "friendly/hostile" scales. Why
>anyone should want to have such a discussion in AFU is another matter.
Indeed. I seem to be generating a lot of loudly proclaimed noninterest
while simultaneously generating a large number of such evaluations. A
most unfascinating paradox.
>However, if Matthew actually wants to talk about these issues (as opposed
>to just being snotty and annoying people) he really needs to
> - do something about his own vocabulary and approach
> (which are currently well over towards the rude/crass/hostile end
> of the scales)
Which way was the article you responded to tipping? (For example, I
used the advanced vocabulary word "mumpsimus", which I thought was on
the approved list, having introduced it as the official AFU Latin motto
some years back.) Both on its own and relative to previous articles of
mine, if you please. I have a difficult time gauging these matters,
especially in such a peculiar locale as the AFU ward, and appreciate
your assistance.
Much obliged.
> - pick a *slightly* stronger example to start with
Good point. What with the 17-year locusts coming out any day now, this
just seemed to be an ideal time for maggotbrain picking.
>and
> - leave me out of it... *please*...
Begging your pardon, Master Phil ... that's just not scientific of you.
>Phil "Nice to know someone read it, though" Edwards
Are you a one-l Phil or a two-l Phil? (Is that polite? Am I encroaching
on a possibly embarrassing issue? Testing, testing ...)
Phil Edwards
Matthew P Wiener wrote:
>
> No, that was not my question, and they have not answered it yet. You see,
> I don't care about flames or your lack of friendship either way. I mean,
> go for it. Like, woo. Xenopsylla cheopis rules forever. Nit nit nit.
>
> What I am asking about is why were the response so *maggotbrained* to
> begin with. Utter, total mumpsimus. Duh exponential.
>
> For example, the counterexample provided to Phil, while friendly, was in
> fact a counterexample (presumably of the doesn't count variety). It would
> have remained a counterexample had it been presented rudely.
>
> He could have also received a response like "begging your pardon, Master
> Phil, but you haven't apparently verified every last instance of people
> saying `potato', and I'm sorry to say that's just not scientific of you,
> and here in folklore we believe in being scientific about these matters."
> Very polite, yes, but deepdoo maggotbrained retarded.
>
And so on and so forth.
Now, this looks like a potentially interesting discussion, which could
result in an approach to evaluating postings simultaneously along
"polite/rude", "intelligent/crass" and "friendly/hostile" scales. Why
anyone should want to have such a discussion in AFU is another matter.
However, if Matthew actually wants to talk about these issues (as opposed
to just being snotty and annoying people) he really needs to
- do something about his own vocabulary and approach
(which are currently well over towards the rude/crass/hostile end
of the scales)
- pick a *slightly* stronger example to start with
and
- leave me out of it... *please*...
Phil "Nice to know someone read it, though" Edwards
Dom Powell
In article <4mpj1c$c...@panix2.panix.com>,
Harry MF Teasley <he...@panix.com> wrote:
>Matthew, stop being such a[n] ... earwig ...
Earwig?
-- Dom | Pie Jesu, Domine, dona eis requiem.... (Whack!) |
Torquewrench, earwig, I dunno....
NOW what?
Bo Bradham
>begin with. Utter, total mumpsimus. Duh exponential.
>
>So, why the maggotbrained responses? As distinct from the hostility.
I was not aware that "maggotbrained" is a technical term, and I
expect a lot of other people are in the same boat. Maybe
that is why you're not getting any satisfactory answers.
Bo "you don't have many friends do you?" Bradham
--
"We consider that any man who can fiddle all through one of
those Virginia Reels without losing his grip, may be depended
upon in any kind of musical emergency."
-- Mark Twain.
Lizz Braver
In article <4mtm36$6...@panix2.panix.com>, bra...@panix.com says...
>
>I was not aware that "maggotbrained" is a technical term, and I
>expect a lot of other people are in the same boat. Maybe
>that is why you're not getting any satisfactory answers.
Any man that considers the word "retard" as an appropriate insult IS a
maggotbrain. How insulting to the retarded citizens of the world! It makes
him sound like he would use the word "nigger", but since he doesn't know
what color we are, he goes for another cheap, disgusting epithet, without
thinking of its impact on those of us with developmently-disabled kids.
Lizz "" Braver
Matthew P Wiener
In article <4mtm36$6...@panix2.panix.com>, bradham@panix (Bo Bradham) writes:
>Matthew P Wiener <wee...@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu> wrote:
>>So, why the maggotbrained responses? As distinct from the hostility.
>I was not aware that "maggotbrained" is a technical term, and I
>expect a lot of other people are in the same boat.
Oh dear. Good point.
A "maggot on the brain" is just a whimsical, fantastic, eccentric idea or
whim. To be "maggotbrained" is thus to have a mind overly brimmed with odd
and offbeat and amusing thoughts. AFU is loaded with such maggotbrained
thinking. It just seemed so unfair to poor Phil that he received none of
this gifted, concentrated attention you are all famous for, and received
just ordinary dull responses, while a mere mite like myself evoked such a
rich and imagined parallel universe of thought. You understand my concern,
I hope.
> Maybe that is why
>you're not getting any satisfactory answers.
That could be it. I hope this elementary vocabulary lesson is of help.
>Bo "you don't have many friends do you?" Bradham
Not many stupid friends, no. I manage.
Michele Tepper
>> [brilliant flame deleted]
>People insulted me, I insulted them back. Deal with it, retard.
Sigh.
*Plonk*
Michele "the rest is silence" Tepper
--
Michele Tepper "...unworthy laborious bet-you-think-I-can't-
mte...@panix.com keep-this-up-bet-I-can..." -- HMF Teasley
Michele Tepper
In article <99...@rook.ukc.ac.uk>, Dom Powell <mh...@ukc.ac.uk> wrote:
>In article <4mpj1c$c...@panix2.panix.com>,
Yup. Pull out your dic: it's in there.
As the OED says:
earwig i<e>.rwig. Forms: 1, 2 earwicga, (1 eorwicga), 5 erwyge,
3erwigge, erewygge, 6 erwygge, (herewigge), 6-7 earwigge, 7 earwick,
earewigg, 6- earwig. OE. éarwicga, f. éar-e, ear sb.1 +OE. wicga
earwig; cf. wiggle v. to wriggle. See also arwygyll. Cf. Fr.
perce-oreille, Ger. ohr-wurm.
1. An insect, Forficula auricularia, so called from the notion that it
penetrates into the head through the ear.
I also find the third definition quite appropriate:
3. Comb., as
EARWIG-BRAIN
earwig-brain, one who has a `maggot' or craze in his brain.
Enough said. The lesson learned here, Dom? The man is a linguistic
genius. Never, ever, *ever* quibble with Harry's word choices.
Michele "at least not in public" Tepper
Ewan Kirk
In Article <4mrcqf$r...@netnews.upenn.edu> Matthew P Wiener finally writes:
>
>Yawn.
>
Right. You're bored with us, we're bored with you. Let's just all
go our separate ways.
Ewan "move right along now folks, Matthew is going to find
somebody more interesting to bother" Kirk.
--E.
Steve Hutton
Matthew P Wiener (wee...@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu) wrote in various posts:
: So. Where is the nobrain rush to flame Phil Edwards for asserting
: this *unscientific* claim when he has not--gosh--personally listened
: to every last Brit or English speaker pronouncing "potato"?
Where have all the maggotbrains gone?
: So rush in already.
Long time passing.
: So what? Why was the claim to mispronounce the word not accompanied by
: flames and criticism that Phil Edwards was being *unscientific* for
: asserting such without personally listening to every last Brit or
: English speaker first?
:
: That was my question--you have not addressed it.
Where have all the maggotbrains gone?
: Why does it have to be before the nobrain rush begins?
Long time ago.
: Eh? Why would that allegation inspire anyone to come up with such
: maggotbrained ideas of the above sort?
Where have all the magotbrains gone?
: It was challenged yes. It was not accompanied by rank retarded comments
: about "folklore is a science" and assertions that every last example of
: any phenomenon is behind any and all "scientific claims".
:
: Why does it being central support make a difference?
Gone to ranting every one.
: People insulted me, I insulted them back. Deal with it, retard
When will they ever learn?
: You didn't answer the question. Duh squared.
When will they ever learn?
: Ah. You know the words, but you don't know the music.
--
Steve Hutton [speaking only for himself]
Matthew P Wiener
In article <4mts5v$c...@ionews.ionet.net>, dillo@ohww (Lizz Braver) writes:
>what color we are, he goes for another cheap, disgusting epithet, without
>thinking of its impact on those of us with developmently-disabled kids.
I haven't called anyone "developmently-disabled". Sheesh.
Matthew Rabuzzi
Matthew P Wiener <wee...@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu> writes:
: A "maggot on the brain" is just a whimsical, fantastic, eccentric idea or
: whim. To be "maggotbrained" is thus to have a mind overly brimmed with odd
Looks like you've misspelled "marotte" here.
Matthew "puffin on a marrot" Rabuzzi
JoAnne Schmitz
wee...@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener) wrote:
>In article <4mmimq$o...@news2.cais.com>, jschmitz@qis (JoAnne Schmitz) writes:
>>wee...@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener) wrote:
>>
>>>In article <3187A9...@dircon.co.uk>, Phil Edwards <news-uk@dircon writes:
>>>>Could I just point out that no one in Britain (no one in the
>>>>English-speaking world AFAIK) has *ever* said "po-tah-to"?
>>>So. Where is the nobrain rush to flame Phil Edwards for asserting
>>>this *unscientific* claim when he has not--gosh--personally listened
>>>to every last Brit or English speaker pronouncing "potato"?
>>1. It wasn't a key part of the legend.
>Why does it have to be before the nobrain rush begins?
There doesn't, and therefore you have proven that there was no nobrain
rush. The importance of the point to the argument was considered by
prospective posters. Sorry.
>>2. Someone provided the counterexample anyway.
>So what?
You said there was no argument over whether someone ever said
"po-tah-toe" yet someone claimed to have said "po-tah-toe." This
makes you a liar, and a damn poor one to think I would ignore the
evidence practically palpitating at your elbow.
>Why was the claim to mispronounce the word not accompanied by
>flames and criticism that Phil Edwards was being *unscientific* for
>asserting such without personally listening to every last Brit or
>English speaker first?
Where did Phil Edwards stupidly hold to his assertion that
"po-tah-toe" was never pronounced in England? He was contradicted by
first-person evidence and he did not follow up with empty puerile
denials.
>That was my question--you have not addressed it.
Liar.
JoAnne "okay, so I do have some insults left" Schmitz
-----------------------------------------------------------
There are emergency contraception pills that you can take
after you have had unprotected sex. They work up to three
days after intercourse. You don't have to wait to be sure
you're pregnant and then have an abortion.
For more information you can call 1-800-584-9911. Or check
the web site http://opr.princeton.edu/ec/ec.html.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Mike D'Angelo
Matthew P Wiener (wee...@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu) wrote:
: No, that was not my question, and they have not answered it yet.
[utter crap elided]
: So, why the maggotbrained responses? As distinct from the hostility.
Ah, but you see, you've altered the question. The original question was
'where are the maggotbrains now?' (see subject line); the revised version
above asks 'why were they so maggotbrained before?' We've provided you
with an answer to your direct question: they didn't jump on Phil because
he isn't an irritating, emotionally-stunted, pathetic twerp. I'll now
answer what was apparently your implicit question: you got some
maggotbrained responses because you *are* an irritating,
emotionally-stunted, pathetic twerp. Your aggressively juvenile manner
and asinine, repetitive invective apparently clouded the judgment of some
otherwise rational and upstanding people. You are a corrupting influence.
In short, it's your own fucking fault. (Whaddaya know -- in this
particular instance, Chris Peek's bizarre theory of 'personal objective
responsibility' feels right. I find myself cheerfully blaming the victim,
and happily exonerating the culprits. Funny how a complete and utter
asshole can distort your reasoning.)
Mike "if you could fuck off at this point, that would be swell" D'Angelo
Matthew P Wiener
In article <4mufnn$c...@news2.cais.com>, jschmitz@qis (JoAnne Schmitz) writes:
>wee...@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener) wrote:
>>In article <4mmimq$o...@news2.cais.com>, jschmitz@qis (JoAnne Schmitz) writes:
>>>wee...@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener) wrote:
>>>>So. Where is the nobrain rush to flame Phil Edwards for asserting
>>>>this *unscientific* claim when he has not--gosh--personally listened
>>>>to every last Brit or English speaker pronouncing "potato"?
>>>1. It wasn't a key part of the legend.
>>Why does it have to be before the nobrain rush begins?
>There doesn't,
That doesn't even parse.
> and therefore you have proven that there was no nobrain
>rush.
Duh? What the hell are you gibbering about?
> The importance of the point to the argument was considered by
>prospective posters. Sorry.
So you're saying that prospective AFU posters jump on minor side issues
with care and accuracy, but for the central point of a disagreement, they
tend to utter any random trash?
>>>2. Someone provided the counterexample anyway.
>>So what?
>You said there was no argument over whether someone ever said
>"po-tah-toe" yet someone claimed to have said "po-tah-toe."
Liar. I said there was no nobrain rush about Phil being unscientific
and the like in making his assertion. Ie, there was a certain _style_
of argument missing, not that there were _no_ arguments.
Is that too complicated for you to figure out?
> This
>makes you a liar, and a damn poor one to think I would ignore the
>evidence practically palpitating at your elbow.
I never said that, so you must be retarded. Ah, I get it--this is the
central point of a disagreement!
>>Why was the claim to mispronounce the word not accompanied by
>>flames and criticism that Phil Edwards was being *unscientific* for
>>asserting such without personally listening to every last Brit or
>>English speaker first?
>Where did Phil Edwards stupidly hold to his assertion that
>"po-tah-toe" was never pronounced in England?
He didn't. What of it?
> He was contradicted by
>first-person evidence and he did not follow up with empty puerile
>denials.
So?
>>That was my question--you have not addressed it.
>Liar.
*Now* you have, apparently. True or false--you do claim that stupidity
rules apply to central points, right? I'm still trying to figure out
how you folks operate.
Matthew P Wiener
In article <4mue4v$h...@panix2.panix.com>, mtepper@panix (Michele Tepper) writes:
>Matthew P Wiener <wee...@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu> wrote:
>>In article <4mpj1c$c...@panix2.panix.com>, het3@panix (Harry MF Teasley) writes:
>
>>> [brilliant flame deleted]
>
>Sigh.
>*Plonk*
Yawn.
Matthew P Wiener
In article <kaxe...@kirk.demon.co.uk>, Ewan Kirk <ewan@kirk writes:
>In Article <4mrcqf$r...@netnews.upenn.edu> Matthew P Wiener finally writes:
>>Yawn.
>Right. You're bored with us, we're bored with you. Let's just all
>go our separate ways.
Bye.
Matthew P Wiener
In article <4mut3u$8...@news.nyu.edu>, mqd8478@is2 (Mike D'Angelo) writes:
>Matthew P Wiener (wee...@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu) wrote:
>: No, that was not my question, and they have not answered it yet.
>[utter crap elided]
>: So, why the maggotbrained responses? As distinct from the hostility.
>Ah, but you see, you've altered the question. The original question was
>'where are the maggotbrains now?' (see subject line); the revised version
>above asks 'why were they so maggotbrained before?'
Come come--the two are flip sides of the same question. There seems to
be a time and a place for maggotbrained responses, and a time and a place
for nonmaggotbrained responses. Identifying the former is equivalent to
identifying the latter.
> We've provided you
>with an answer to your direct question: they didn't jump on Phil because
>he isn't an irritating, emotionally-stunted, pathetic twerp. I'll now
>answer what was apparently your implicit question: you got some
>maggotbrained responses because you *are* an irritating,
>emotionally-stunted, pathetic twerp. Your aggressively juvenile manner
>and asinine, repetitive invective apparently clouded the judgment of some
>otherwise rational and upstanding people.
Oh dear. Insulting people who insult me leads to third party stupidity?
Pointing out that some stupid things are in fact stupid leads to even more
stupidity?
Woooo. That chain goes straight into the sky!
> You are a corrupting influence.
Thanks for the tip.
Lee Rudolph
wee...@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener) writes:
>Come come--the two are flip sides of the same question. There seems to
>be a time and a place for maggotbrained responses, and a time and a place
>for nonmaggotbrained responses.
Is it time to bring up "Songs about Maggotbrainfunction" (by Pete Seeger
out of The Preacher Formerly Known as King Solomon)?
Lee "b/w `Nearer Maggot to Thee'" Rudolph
Len Berlind
In re Matthew P Wiener, Bradham The Younger wrote:
>I was not aware that "maggotbrained" is a technical term, and I
>expect a lot of other people are in the same boat. Maybe
>that is why you're not getting any satisfactory answers.
And in reply Lizz Braver wrote:
} Any man that considers the word "retard" as an appropriate insult IS a
} maggotbrain. How insulting to the retarded citizens of the world! It makes
} him sound like he would use the word "nigger", but since he doesn't know
} what color we are, he goes for another cheap, disgusting epithet, without
} thinking of its impact on those of us with developmently-disabled kids.
} Lizz "" Braver
Now comes Matthew P Wiener:
: In article <4mts5v$c...@ionews.ionet.net>, dillo@ohww (Lizz Braver) writes:
: >what color we are, he goes for another cheap, disgusting epithet, without
: >thinking of its impact on those of us with developmently-disabled kids.
: I haven't called anyone "developmently-disabled". Sheesh.
This is true. However what you have done here is to avoid Lizz Braver's
point. You regularly use the term "retard" in an insulting way. She finds
it offensive. I find that usage as offensive as any racial/ethnic/gender
epithet. I doubt we are the only ones reading this newsgroup who hold that
opinion.
Care to address the issue directly?
L"Or did the weasel season open earlier than usual this year?"B
Joachim Lous
Quoth Harry MF Teasley:
: Matthew P Wiener bequeathed:
: > So what? Why was the claim to mispronounce the word not accompanied by
: > flames and criticism that Phil Edwards was being *unscientific* for
: > asserting such without personally listening to every last Brit or
: > English speaker first?
: Matthew, stop being such a maggot-brained pissant foul-smelling cranky
[much abuse regrettably snipped]
: sleep-inducing nightmarish disagreeable snotty prize-winning-jerk limp
: illogical uncouth piddling blue-ribbon-scumbag negligible insulting
: unreasonable pablum-puking strange little putz. Go home.
: Harry "feel free to not come back" Teasley
Aww c'mon, Don't be shy. Tell him how you _really_ feel!
Ewan Kirk
Byte Matthew. It's been real.
Ewan "and now back to our regular AFU diet" Kirk.
--E.
Phil Gustafson
Harry MF Teasley took a deep breath and said:
>
>Matthew, stop being such a maggot-brained pissant foul-smelling cranky
>danglesocket wannabe know-nothing painful-rectal-itch-of-a-person asswipe
>snot-sucking gaping-wound-where-the-brain-should-be trying annoying sickly
>childish fuckwit dipshit knock-kneed piggy shit-spewing hate-filled
>needle-dick trash-talking ill-conceived personality-transplant-needing
>pinheaded sack-of-pus urinal-breath dingleberry incognizant lame-ass
>breathable-air-wasting meat-by-product horse-faced decaf-drinking
>thumb-sucking no-date shivelled-spirit loser hose-bag bitch-talking
>crybaby craven toejam no-sense-of-humor prick cause-having no-sense
>unworthy laborious bet-you-think-I-can't-keep-this-up-bet-I-can facile
>reprobate ungraceful slackbladder clue-repellent just-plain-repellent
>momma's-boy wailing sniggeringly-inept uncreative immature lackluster
>beneath-contempt piss-poor mild-geek-by-day-but-fucking-offal-eating-
>shithead-by-night wormy crass no-excuse unclear-on-the-concept
>attention-craving net-loon drive-by-shooting-candidate freakish stupid
>lying shitty snivelling no-class lower-than-dirt illiterate unprofessional
>pico-dick-nonpareil inadequate laughable inept uncultured repugnant prig
>goober earwig flaccid zero-friends did-you-ever-finish-that-degree-
>at-Berkley-or-are-your-pompous-posts-your-way-of-trying-to-deal-with-your-
>failures-as-a-real- mathematician grunting nakedly-juvenile-to-the-core
>embarrassing masochistic goose-egg-IQ hellspawn inarticulate flailing
>funkless dolt creepy monstrous socially-clumsy dog-kibble noxious
>atrophied-neuron irredeemable posting-recklessly-while-under-the-
>delusion-you-can-actually-think truculent mycogenous goony
>spittle-spraying one-track-minded nebbish hopelessly-outclassed pofaced
>amoral toadlike craptrap buttinski loopy spoiled-brat idiotic
>you-should-eat-more-because-it's-obvious-your-body-is-scavenging-
>your-grey-matter-for-nourishment boorish whiny unsound capable-of-
>sucking-ambient-humor-from-the-very-air atrocious imbecilic wanker
>impotent malodorous dismissable boring incapable callous mean-spirited
>snippy piece-of-dung evil nerdy almost-not-worth-this-but-
>I-gotta-say-you're-a-fun-target pre-pubescent cheesy monosyllabic
>safe-and-effective-diuretic rank-smelling fetid ditchwater peculiar
>thick-skulled troglodyte wheedling monkey-boy pukestain inbred
>flirting-with-intelligence-but-getting-the-cold-shoulder-in-return
>distressing Air-Supply-listening scrotum-sniffing illkempt weedy
>figment-of-Satan's-imagination bottom-feeding cromagnon pasty-faced
>Don-of-the-Moron-Mafia colostomy-brain pathetic nipple-biter noisome
>irrelevant be-sure-to-say-"when" deportee-from-the-Land-of-Good-Taste
>bile-inducing ridiculous feverish malignant feeble nauseating dribbly
>schmuck blisteringly-dull brane-challenged etiquette-impaired
>mouth-breathing intellectual-pea lard-butt unremarkable dozen-word-
>vocabulary amateurish King-of-Denial weenerbrane useless trivial
>sleep-inducing nightmarish disagreeable snotty prize-winning-jerk limp
>illogical uncouth piddling blue-ribbon-scumbag negligible insulting
>unreasonable pablum-puking strange little putz. Go home.
"pabulum". "Cro-Magnon" needs its majuscules and hyphen. "Berkeley" has
three "e"'s. "Funkless" can be misinterpreted. You missed
"shriveled-dork-in-its-original-cosmoline". You didn't expand sufficiently
on the "weenerbrane" motif. A-.
On the other hand, your breath control stands as a good example to smokers
everywhere. Keep it up.
Ph.
Harry MF Teasley
Phil Gustafson bequeathed:
> "Pablum" is a trademark, and should be capitalized. Perhaps you meant
> "pabulum". "Cro-Magnon" needs its majuscules and hyphen. "Berkeley" has
> three "e"'s. "Funkless" can be misinterpreted. You missed
> "shriveled-dork-in-its-original-cosmoline". You didn't expand sufficiently
> on the "weenerbrane" motif. A-.
I hang my head in shame on all of these except "pablum", which you forced
me to look up in my brand-spanking new Random House Unabridged (purchased
half-off the regular Crown Books discount as it's box was sorta mashed
up, but the dic's in perfect shape).
Pablum (pab'lem), 1. /Trademark/. a brand of soft, bland cereal for
infants. /-n/. 2. (/l.c./) trite, naive, or simplistic ideas or
writings; intellectual pap.
So if you don't give me my A+ I'm going to the Dean and telling him that
you're costing me my ability to get into the art graduate school of my
choice as well as money for the Harry Teasley Commemorative Invective
Library.
And yes, I also forgot shmendrick scrofulous asinine intellectual-rigor-
of-a-heavily-sedated-Afghan-hound undescended-testicle malcontent
promising-candidate-for-experimental-euthanisation-of-the-terminally-
clueless bad obstreperous neuroparalytic fungus-that-walks-like-a-man
skull-cavity-filled-with-peat-and-soft-loam mass-of-erectile-tissue
piercingly-shrill inflatable-sheep-fucking anthropomorphised-cowpat
dribbly anal-retentive pedantic dark-socks-with-white-sneakers-wearing
masturbator's-elbow-sufferer cheesedick pocket-lint ho-hum fewmethead
mental-fly-weight eggshell-ego-typical-of-those-monomaniacal-types can't-
play-hardball pants-pissing extra-from-the-set-of-_Deliverance_ poopy
unoriginal couldn't-cut-the-mustard-with-a-cleaver fun-equivalent-of-a-
visit-to-the-mortuary voted-"Mr. Root Canal"-by-his-high-school-class
missing-link hyperventilating creepazoid namby-pamby weaselly-but-not-in-
a-cool-ice-weasel-way probably-rooted-for-Elmer-Fudd-on-Saturday-mornings
urine-in-the-gene-pool superdick.
I'll do better next time.
Harry "Official AFU Retard (and Homo, can't forget Homo)" Teasley
--
"there are two types of people in the world: those who answer 'two-fifty'
to that question, and those who do not."
Matthew P Wiener
In article <4n0jcf$d...@panix2.panix.com>, lberlind@panix (Len Berlind) writes:
>Now comes Matthew P Wiener:
>: In article <4mts5v$c...@ionews.ionet.net>, dillo@ohww (Lizz Braver) writes:
>: >what color we are, he goes for another cheap, disgusting epithet, without
>: >thinking of its impact on those of us with developmently-disabled kids.
>: I haven't called anyone "developmently-disabled". Sheesh.
>This is true. However what you have done here is to avoid Lizz Braver's
>point.
Not at all. I answered it spot on. Perhaps you suffer from D'Angelo
syndrome?
> You regularly use the term "retard" in an insulting way.
And a fairly accurate way.
> She finds
>it offensive. I find that usage as offensive as any racial/ethnic/gender
>epithet. I doubt we are the only ones reading this newsgroup who hold that
>opinion.
Some slurs and epithets are specific. They have no generally recognized
meaning beyond the subject group. Other terms--especially those formed by
metaphor from human limitations, like "blind", "deaf", "dumb", "lame"--are
understood both as a term for a concrete handicap and as a broad metaphor.
I see no maggotbrains jumping on people for using _these_ terms.
In Japan, by the way, PC has prohibited much of the use of even these terms.
>Care to address the issue directly?
In summary, had I used "developmently-disabled" as a description of anyone,
Lizz would have had a point, since the phrase is specific, as are many other
slurs. I hadn't, so she was just reaching.
Madeleine Page
Harry Teasley got all het up and said:
>weaselly-but-not-in-a-cool-ice-weasel-way
Good save, sir. Damn good save.
Phil, give the lad his A+.
Madeleine "stoatally beguiled" Page
--
Chris Fishel
imf...@primenet.com (Patrick Fine) writes:
> In article <4mrcqf$r...@netnews.upenn.edu>,
> wee...@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener) wrote:
> >Yawn.
>
> Good, he is getting tired, when he falls asleep, let's steal his kidney.
>
> Patrick "And his eyes, fingers, tongue, heart (if still there) liver, other
> kidney..." Fine
I thought the proposed program to harvest organs from
anencephalic infants had long ago been scotched due to concerns
about ethics-cum-bad publicity. When did it get revived?
Chris "Just wondering" Fishel
Derek Tearne
In article <4n0jcf$d...@panix2.panix.com>,
>
>This is true. However what you have done here is to avoid Lizz Braver's
>epithet. I doubt we are the only ones reading this newsgroup who hold that
>opinion.
You are, as it happens, completely correct. I hold that opinion too!
Matthew's continued use of the word 'retard' is quite offensive.
His bleating of 'I haven't called anyone "developmentally-disabled"'
shows that he doesn't understand the meaning of the word he uses with
such fervour.
Derek "Like, duh" Tearne
--
Derek Tearne. -- http://webservices.comp.vuw.ac.nz/artsLink/ManyHands/
Some of the more environmentally aware dinosaurs were worried about the
consequences of an accident with the new Iridium enriched fusion reactor.
"If it goes off only the cockroaches and mammals will survive..." they said.
Elizabeth Flynn
Harry MF Teasley wrote:
> I hang my head in shame on all of these except "pablum", which you forced
> me to look up in my brand-spanking new Random House Unabridged (purchased
> half-off the regular Crown Books discount as it's box was sorta mashed
> up, but the dic's in perfect shape).
Forget the dictionary, I want to know what thesaurus you're using. It
obviously has Roget's beat all hollow, and I want one.
I'd vote for the A+.
Elizabeth Flynn
lwil...@mcopn1.dseg.ti.com
Matthew P Wiener
In article <4n6clt$6...@nezsdc.fujitsu.co.nz>, derek@nezsdc (Derek Tearne) writes:
>In article <4n0jcf$d...@panix2.panix.com>,
>Len Berlind <lber...@panix.com> wrote:
>>Now comes Matthew P Wiener:
>>: I haven't called anyone "developmently-disabled". Sheesh.
>>This is true. However what you have done here is to avoid Lizz Braver's
>>point. You regularly use the term "retard" in an insulting way. She finds
>>it offensive. I find that usage as offensive as any racial/ethnic/gender
>>epithet. I doubt we are the only ones reading this newsgroup who hold that
>>opinion.
>You are, as it happens, completely correct. I hold that opinion too!
*Obviously* your opinions as to what is offensive is your business.
Sheesh.
>Matthew's continued use of the word 'retard' is quite offensive.
>His bleating of 'I haven't called anyone "developmentally-disabled"'
>shows that he doesn't understand the meaning of the word he uses with
>such fervour.
And you just as obviously miss the point. Duh duh duh.
Angus Johnston
Len Berlind wrote:
> > You regularly use the term "retard" in an insulting way.
> >I find that usage as offensive as any racial/ethnic/gender
> >epithet. I doubt we are the only ones reading this newsgroup who hold that
> >opinion.
I agree. In replying to Matthew Wiener's reply below, though, I don't
delude myself that I'm going to be changing his mind. He's got his
"everybody's a bunch of idiots" glasses on, and the dim light of my
intellect is hardly likely to penetrate.
But his defense is a familiar one, and I'd like to respond. Not for his
benefit, but because he's saying something that others are probably
thinking.
At any rate, Matthew replied to Len as follows:
> Some slurs and epithets are specific. They have no generally recognized
> meaning beyond the subject group.
I don't know which slurs you're thinking of here---ethnically
derogatory terms are frequently used to describe people who share the
supposed traits of the original target. Would you argue that it's not
offensive to refer to haggling as "Jewing someone down," as long as the
haggler is a Christian?
> Other terms--especially those formed by
> metaphor from human limitations, like "blind", "deaf", "dumb", "lame"--are
> understood both as a term for a concrete handicap and as a broad metaphor.
>
> I see no maggotbrains jumping on people for using _these_ terms.
Let's look at that list, then, and try to figure out why.
"Dumb" and "lame" are archaisms when used literally, so they carry no
more power to hurt than, say, "gyp," or "welsh." Similar cases are
"idiot" and "moron," which gained currency as clinical terms, but have
now passed over entirely into the vernacular. They're figures of speech
that maintain little connection to the physical conditions they
describe, and although some might take offense, it would seem to be on
the basis of principle more than anything else.
"Blind" and "deaf" aren't even slurs, so they're not all that relevant
here. "Retard," on the other hand, _is_ a slur, one that is in common
use, and one which people with developmental disabilities are assaulted
with regularly. Myself, I cringe every time I hear it, because I know
that it's the one epithet that my learning disabled sister finds most
offensive and most hurtful.
Calling a person you find unintelligent a retard is the equivalent of
calling someone a kike because they're cheap or a nigger because
they're poor. It's offensive, it's disgusting, and there's no excuse
for it.
--
Angus Johnston
http://www.panix.com/~angusj
Angus Johnston
Len Berlind wrote:
> > You regularly use the term "retard" in an insulting way.
> >I find that usage as offensive as any racial/ethnic/gender
> >epithet. I doubt we are the only ones reading this newsgroup who hold that
> >opinion.
I agree. In replying to Matthew Wiener's reply below, though, I don't
delude myself that I'm going to be changing his mind. He's got his
"everybody's a bunch of idiots" glasses on, and the dim light of my
intellect is hardly likely to penetrate. But his defense is a familiar
one, and I'd like to respond. Not so much for his benefit as because
he's saying stuff that others are probably thinking.
At any rate, Matthew replied to Len as follows:
> Some slurs and epithets are specific. They have no generally recognized
> meaning beyond the subject group.
I don't know which slurs you're thinking of here---ethnically
derogatory terms are frequently used to describe people who share the
supposed traits of the original target. Would you argue that it's not
offensive to refer to haggling as "Jewing someone down," as long as the
haggler is a Christian?
> Other terms--especially those formed by
> metaphor from human limitations, like "blind", "deaf", "dumb", "lame"--are
> understood both as a term for a concrete handicap and as a broad metaphor.
>
> I see no maggotbrains jumping on people for using _these_ terms.
Let's look at that list, then, and try to figure out why.
"Dumb" and "lame" are archaisms when used literally, so they carry no
more power to hurt than, say, "gyp," or "welsh." Similar cases are
"idiot" and "moron," which gained currency as clinical terms, but have
now passed over entirely into the vernacular. They're figures of speech
that maintain little connection to the conditions they describe, and
Matthew P Wiener
>> > You regularly use the term "retard" in an insulting way.
>> >I find that usage as offensive as any racial/ethnic/gender
>> >epithet. I doubt we are the only ones reading this newsgroup who hold that
>> >opinion.
>I agree. In replying to Matthew Wiener's reply below, though, I don't
>delude myself that I'm going to be changing his mind. He's got his
>"everybody's a bunch of idiots" glasses on,
So say something intelligent.
> and the dim light of my
>intellect is hardly likely to penetrate. But his defense is a familiar
>one, and I'd like to respond. Not so much for his benefit as because
>he's saying stuff that others are probably thinking.
By the way, my defense was an explanation of why Lizz Braver's conclusion
that I would use racial epithets as I use "retard" was inaccurate. The
two are not analogous.
I am _not_ claiming no one takes offense, nor that they should not, nor
that I'm just a misunderstood charmer.
>At any rate, Matthew replied to Len as follows:
>> Some slurs and epithets are specific. They have no generally recognized
>> meaning beyond the subject group.
>I don't know which slurs you're thinking of here---
There was the one I was accused of not using simply because the net is
colorblind.
> ethnically
>derogatory terms are frequently used to describe people who share the
>supposed traits of the original target.
Right. They are making specific reference to the target group anyway.
Many such slurs are _not_ used in such a way though.
> Would you argue that it's not
>offensive to refer to haggling as "Jewing someone down," as long as the
>haggler is a Christian?
The above is still a derogatory reference to Jews.
>> Other terms--especially those formed by metaphor from human
>> limitations, like "blind", "deaf", "dumb", "lame"--are understood
>> both as a term for a concrete handicap and as a broad metaphor.
>> I see no maggotbrains jumping on people for using _these_ terms.
>Let's look at that list, then, and try to figure out why.
>"Dumb" and "lame" are archaisms when used literally, so they carry no
>more power to hurt than, say, "gyp," or "welsh."
"Dumb" and "lame" are certainly not archaisms.
Have you ever asked any Welsh about "welsh", by the way? I have no idea
whether they find it offensive. I would not presume.
> Similar cases are
>"idiot" and "moron," which gained currency as clinical terms, but have
>now passed over entirely into the vernacular.
So if I use "retard", I'm offensive, but "idiot", I'm not? I really
don't see the difference. How about "cretin"?
> They're figures of speech
>that maintain little connection to the conditions they describe, and
>although some might take offense, it would seem to be on the basis of
>principle more than anything else.
>"Blind" and "deaf" aren't even slurs, so they're not all that relevant
>here.
That depends on where you live. In Japan, referring to someone as "blind",
whether literally or metaphorically, has become taboo in the past decade.
> "Retard," on the other hand, _is_ a slur, one that is in common
>use, and one which people with developmental disabilities are assaulted
>with regularly.
So if I went around and criticized people for being "developmentally
disabled", that would be OK, because that term is not used as a slur
on the target group? I find this worse.
> Myself, I cringe every time I hear it, because I know
>that it's the one epithet that my learning disabled sister finds most
>offensive and most hurtful.
At the request of some scj readers, I consulted with two highly knowledge-
able rabbis on the use of "retard". One has a mildly retarded son, one has
a severely retarded brother. Both considered it acceptable. One insisted
that it be used as a synonym only for "very very very stupid", and the other
permitted more general uses.
A funny thing happened on the way to asking one of the rabbis. Another son
had been going on, in his usual very skilled mimetic way, about how they do
certain things in a certain community. He kept peppering his talk with
"retarded" this and "retarded" that. Both the rabbi, the retarded son,
and the rest of the family were laughing the whole time at this little
performance. So I waited a day before asking the rabbi, and even then I
had to preface my comments that I was not intending to criticize his son.
My own experience on this particular offensensitivity is simply different
than yours. Part of that is perhaps that people I know _only_ use "retard"
in the metaphoric sense, so far as I can tell. Some supplier can't get
his act together, or some clueless government regulation comes down, and
out comes "retarded".
(And personally, I don't find "jew" as a verb all that offensive anyway.)
Dave Blake
In article <4n4rbl$7...@netnews.upenn.edu>, Matthew P Wiener
<wee...@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu> writes
>
>> You regularly use the term "retard" in an insulting way.
>
>
Listen old boy, as someone who has been flamed recently (in a far less
incendary way then you , I admit) I have to say that your posts do come
in on the, how shall we say?, more _offensive_ side of things.
Try and inject a little wit and humo(u)r, eh? There's a good chap.
TTFN
Dave Blake
London, England
Derek Tearne
In article <4n7bpp$a...@netnews.upenn.edu>,
Matthew P Wiener <wee...@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu> wrote:
>In article <4n6clt$6...@nezsdc.fujitsu.co.nz>, derek@nezsdc (Derek Tearne) writes:
>>In article <4n0jcf$d...@panix2.panix.com>,
>>Len Berlind <lber...@panix.com> wrote:
>>>I doubt we are the only ones reading this newsgroup who hold that
>>>opinion.
>
>>You are, as it happens, completely correct. I hold that opinion too!
>
>*Obviously* your opinions as to what is offensive is your business.
Huh. I wasn't referring to my opinion per se, merely confirming
Len's suspicion that he was not alone in that opinion.
>>His bleating of 'I haven't called anyone "developmentally-disabled"'
>>shows that he doesn't understand the meaning of the word he uses with
>>such fervour.
>
>And you just as obviously miss the point. Duh duh duh.
The point being?
It seems to me that the point is that anyone who disgree's with
Matthew P. Weiner is, in his eyes, retarded in some fashion (one assumes
mentally, one assumes mentally but he could mean timing I suppose).
Does this mean that, on the occasions in the past when, like myself,
those people have _agreed_ with Matthew P. Weiner, that they were somehow
_not_ retarded?
Great heavens.
To dismiss someone as a 'retard' when they are clearly simply disagreeing
with one is insulting and derogatory.
To dismiss someone as a 'retard' if they are indeed somehow mentally
deficient is particularly impolite.
Matthew P Wiener
In article <4n8o7g$j...@nezsdc.fujitsu.co.nz>, derek@nezsdc (Derek Tearne) writes:
>In article <4n7bpp$a...@netnews.upenn.edu>,
>Matthew P Wiener <wee...@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu> wrote:
>>In article <4n6clt$6...@nezsdc.fujitsu.co.nz>, derek@nezsdc (Derek Tearne) writes:
>>>In article <4n0jcf$d...@panix2.panix.com>,
>>>Len Berlind <lber...@panix.com> wrote:
>>>>I doubt we are the only ones reading this newsgroup who hold that
>>>>opinion.
>>>You are, as it happens, completely correct. I hold that opinion too!
>>*Obviously* your opinions as to what is offensive is your business.
>Huh. I wasn't referring to my opinion per se, merely confirming
>Len's suspicion that he was not alone in that opinion.
OK. Sorry for reiterating the obvious there.
>>>His bleating of 'I haven't called anyone "developmentally-disabled"'
>>>shows that he doesn't understand the meaning of the word he uses with
>>>such fervour.
>>And you just as obviously miss the point. Duh duh duh.
>The point being?
The point being that developmentally-disabled _is_ specific, and I have
not used such specific references.
>It seems to me that the point is that anyone who disgree's with
>Matthew P. Weiner is, in his eyes, retarded in some fashion
No. Not even close.
>To dismiss someone as a 'retard' when they are clearly simply disagreeing
>with one is insulting and derogatory.
Correct. I don't do that.
>To dismiss someone as a 'retard' if they are indeed somehow mentally
>deficient is particularly impolite.
Indeed it is. I am regularly impolite to stupid people who proudly wave
their stupidity around.
Matthew P Wiener
In article <AfbqeIAc...@zevon.demon.co.uk>, Dave Blake <dave@zevon writes:
>In article <4n4rbl$7...@netnews.upenn.edu>, Matthew P Wiener
><wee...@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu> writes
>>> You regularly use the term "retard" in an insulting way.
>>And a fairly accurate way.
>Listen old boy, as someone who has been flamed recently (in a far less
>incendary way then you , I admit) I have to say that your posts do come
>in on the, how shall we say?, more _offensive_ side of things.
Indeed they do.
>Try and inject a little wit and humo(u)r, eh? There's a good chap.
Hey. Some does slip in. If you don't get it at first, just bang your
head against your terminal a few times, and report back.
Len Berlind
Matthew P Wiener (wee...@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu) wrote:
: >This is true. However what you have done here is to avoid Lizz Braver's
: >point.
: Not at all. I answered it spot on.
No, you regularly use the term "retard" in an insulting way. Lizz and
others find that behavior insulting.
: > You regularly use the term "retard" in an insulting way.
: And a fairly accurate way.
And in an insulting way which many find offensive.
: Some slurs and epithets are specific. They have no generally recognized
: meaning beyond the subject group. Other terms--especially those formed by
: metaphor from human limitations, like "blind", "deaf", "dumb", "lame"--are
: understood both as a term for a concrete handicap and as a broad metaphor.
So what? You might have a point if you used the term "retarded". But you
regularly use the term "retard" in an insulting way. Many find that
behavior offensive.
: In summary, had I used "developmently-disabled" as a description of anyone,
: Lizz would have had a point, since the phrase is specific, as are many other
: slurs. I hadn't, so she was just reaching.
Bullshit. You regularly use the term "retard" in an insulting way. Lizz
finds that behavior offensive. So do others. Care to address the issue
directly?
Robert Francis Christensen (The Great Robholio)
In response to wee...@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu, Dave Blake
(da...@zevon.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: I have to say that your posts do come
: in on the, how shall we say?, more _offensive_ side of things.
Actually, I'm pretty sure the majority of these people could use a little
offending.
--
******************************************************************************
* Robert Francis Christensen / \
* Industrial Engineering <o>
* Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo /_|_|_\
* http://www.calpoly.edu/~rchriste /_|_|_|_|_\
******************************************************************************
Matthew P Wiener
In article <4naa55$i...@panix2.panix.com>, lberlind@panix (Len Berlind) writes:
>Matthew P Wiener (wee...@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu) wrote:
>: >This is true. However what you have done here is to avoid Lizz Braver's
>: >point.
>: Not at all. I answered it spot on.
>No, you regularly use the term "retard" in an insulting way. Lizz and
>others find that behavior insulting.
Her point was that I would use pretty much any insulting term. That
is what I answered.
>: > You regularly use the term "retard" in an insulting way.
>: And a fairly accurate way.
>And in an insulting way which many find offensive.
Yes.
>: Some slurs and epithets are specific. They have no generally recognized
>: meaning beyond the subject group. Other terms--especially those formed by
>: metaphor from human limitations, like "blind", "deaf", "dumb", "lame"--are
>: understood both as a term for a concrete handicap and as a broad metaphor.
>So what? You might have a point if you used the term "retarded". But you
>regularly use the term "retard" in an insulting way. Many find that
>behavior offensive.
They do. What of it already?
Harry MF Teasley
Robert Francis Christensen (The Great Robholio) bequeathed:
> : I have to say that your posts do come
> : in on the, how shall we say?, more _offensive_ side of things.
> Actually, I'm pretty sure the majority of these people could use a little
> offending.
Oh, no, my worst nightmare: tag-team flaming with Rob and Matthew. Great.
The only thing that offends me about this thread is the quality of
conversation it has spawned. Matthew might have literally hundreds of
words in his vocabulary but has only demonstrated working familiarity
with a dozen or so. Given some semi-intelligent posts from him, even
flames that were offensive AND funny instead of merely offensive, and
he might very well fit right in.
Rob, you seem to have a hard-on for a flaming you got, what, last fall?
Get over it already. If it's your mission to offend us out of our ivory
towers, please don't bother; I've got equity tied up in mine, and I ain't
leaving.
Harry "come hell or high water" Teasley
Stephan Zielinski
he...@panix.com (Harry MF Teasley) wrote:
> Matthew, stop being such a maggot-brained pissant foul-smelling cranky
. . . mass deletia . . .
> unreasonable pablum-puking strange little putz. Go home.
Thank God. I've been getting *so* bored with the voice synthesis test
text I've been using.
--
Stephan "Evacuate. Evacuate. Oh, never mind. You don't have a hope
in Hell" Zielinski
Robert Francis Christensen (The Great Robholio)
Harry MF Teasley (he...@panix.com) wrote:
: Oh, no, my worst nightmare: tag-team flaming with Rob and Matthew. Great.
No, Matthew seems to be doing alright on his own. Although I must admit,
I myself am getting a little bored with "like, duh" and "retard". Nope,
I'm just another traveler on the "information superhighway" throwing in
his own .02.
: The only thing that offends me about this thread is the quality of
: conversation it has spawned.
Are you referring to the debate over the use of the word "retard"? Well...
OK, I'll buy it. But what about your infamous 5-page super-flames?
Granted, they're rather entertaining, and I'm sure you work very hard on
them, but come on now...
: Rob, you seem to have a hard-on for a flaming you got, what, last fall?
Actually, it was only a coupla' months ago.
: Get over it already. If it's your mission to offend us out of our ivory
: towers, please don't bother; I've got equity tied up in mine, and I ain't
: leaving.
Ivory towers, eh? Harry, I doubt _nuclear holocaust_ could get you out
of those towers. No, it's more a matter of throwing toilet paper in your
trees, or leaving a lighted bag of dogshit on your doorstep.
But let's not start in on analogies.
Why am I here, you ask? Oh, there are lots of different reasons. I
suppose an entire thread dedicated to the "maggotbrains" of AFU was just
too much for me to resist. (Coincidentally, I never considered any of you
as "maggotbrains", but I do so love a good flame.)
Rob "Tell me I didn't say the words 'information superhighway'" Christensen
Matthew P Wiener
In article <4nb05c$2...@panix2.panix.com>, het3@panix (Harry MF Teasley) writes:
>Robert Francis Christensen (The Great Robholio) bequeathed:
>> In response to wee...@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu, Dave Blake
>> (da...@zevon.demon.co.uk) wrote:
>> : I have to say that your posts do come
>> : in on the, how shall we say?, more _offensive_ side of things.
>> Actually, I'm pretty sure the majority of these people could use a little
>> offending.
>Oh, no, my worst nightmare: tag-team flaming with Rob and Matthew. Great.
Look at the little hypocrite cry. Sheesh.
>The only thing that offends me about this thread is the quality of
>conversation it has spawned.
Indeed. You've been pretty much bottom of the barrel in that department.
> Matthew might have literally hundreds of
>words in his vocabulary but has only demonstrated working familiarity
>with a dozen or so.
You've demonstrated working familiarity with about five.
> Given some semi-intelligent posts from him, even
>flames that were offensive AND funny instead of merely offensive, and
>he might very well fit right in.
There were several very funny ones in there. Too bad you're too busy
being stupid and offended, or you might have noticed.
Len Berlind
: >But you
: >regularly use the term "retard" in an insulting way. Many find that
: >behavior offensive.
: They do. What of it already?
"What of it"? Heh. No human could possibly be that obtuse. 'Fess up
Matthew - you really are an AI.
Matthew P Wiener
There are many things that are offensive to various parties on AFU. For
example, apparent violations of the Communications Decency Act seem to
generate untold agony in certain quarters.
Yet I see no decency patrol operating here. So I conclude that pointing
out that something *I* say is offensive is not done out of concern of
potential offensiveness. Hence my question.
Try answering it.
Thus, so long as such double standards are applied when criticizing me,
I will assume the posters doing so are pathetic retards.
Matthew Weiner
Len Berlind wrote,
: "What of it"? Heh. No human could possibly be that obtuse. 'Fess up
We were talking about you, not me
Harry MF Teasley
Matthew P Wiener bequeathed:
> Yet I see no decency patrol operating here. So I conclude that pointing
> out that something *I* say is offensive is not done out of concern of
> potential offensiveness. Hence my question.
Valid question (who'da thunk it?), and it deserves a valid answer.
Essentially, you are not funny while being offensive. You showed us that
you often have nothing to say other than "retard", "Like, duh", and "Yawn".
When it comes to a verbal sparring partner, you have no place in the ring.
Now I'll be the first to admit that someone might find "foul-mouthed
offensive disgusting misogynistic misanthropic sack-of-pus evil
shit-spewing hellspawn boot-licking ill-mannered trash-talking hate-filled
no-sense-making begging-for-an-ass-kicking scum-sucking trailer-park
shithole-for-a-mouth make-me-wish-I-had-a-big-fucking-hammer-to-beat-
some-sense-into-you white-trash unrepentantly-and-wickedly-perverse
hunchbacked socially-inept toadlike maggoty boorish sexually-undesirable
invective-spouting facist sheet-and-pointy-hat-wearing backwards manic
creepy unfit-for-human-consumption worthless crappy ratlike
wholly-devoid-of-virtue lacking-in-any-sort-of-grace-or-erudition toejam
dingleberry snotty revolting I-would-keep-this-up-all-day-if-there-
were-enough-words-in-the-English-language-to-describe-what-a-freakish-
monstrosity-you-are irritating corrupt unredeemable can't-be-allowed-
sharp-objects no-neuron nazi hopeless utterly-incredible-in-your-
astoundingly-bad-taste onerous wanker's-elbow-suffering flame-inviting
classless clue-repulsing arrogant trying-on-one's-patience space-wasting
limp fearlessly-posting-disgusting-insults-with-an-anonymous-handle
dishonorable filthy debased ordure-eating raving insulting bringing-
a-fucking-penknife-of-an-intellect-to-a-nukefest-of-a-battle-of-wits
cursed addled whiny sunken-chest humorless name-calling rent-boy
hemorrhoidal mucus-dripping vomitous piss-poor pathetic-excuse-for-a-
piece-of-shit painful eye-rollingly-subhuman neanderthal glassy-eyed
living-proof-of-why-cousins-shouldn't-marry beastly incapable-of-coming-
to-terms-with-your-own-wretched-existence inexcusable lobotomized
threat-to-the-gene-pool needing-of-professional-supervision vile awful
god-damnedest sickeningly-ugly spiritually-devoid reprehensible
walking-advertisement-for-a-state-sponsored-sterility-program that
has ever obtained Usenet access" offensive, but when it got posted
originally, and given the target (everyone who remembers Mr. Equality
raise your hand), it got good response. Whatever offense that folks felt
was drowned in the overwhelming relief that followed Mr. Equality's exit
from the froup.
You, on the other hand, have endeared yourself to no one, have shown no
ability to laugh at yourself, have shown no creativity with words, and are
generally thought to be a poor sport. Your loud whining about how you're
unfairly put-upon here only makes the sensible wonder why you bother
posting here at all. Surely you're a Big Wheel in sci.math.assholes or
something, so why don't you go strut your stuff there and stop giving
snotty little bullies such as myself further opportunity to toot my own
horn at your expense? It can't be gratifying for you here.
Of course, you won't do anything that could be construed as following
someone else's orders, as few net.egos manage to withstand the taunting
that follows an exit from the fight. Tell you what: you reply to this
posting in a manner that could be construed as "humor" on any planet
except your obviously weird home one, and I will be the first to cut you
some slack. Reply by calling me a "retard" *again* and you dig your hole
ever deeper. Not that I expect you to care, or anything; just answering
your question.
Harry "show some class" Teasley
Vicki Robinson
nastygr...@ignored.mail.com is purported to have said
You mispledt: "I know you are, but what am I?"
Vicki "HTH" Robinson
--
Vicki Robinson
<blink><a href="http://www.rit.edu/~vjrnts/binky.html">BINKY!</a></blink>
Visit my home page at <a href="http://www.rit.edu/~vjrnts"> Vicki's Home Page
</a> and sign my guest book. Millions have!
Derek Tearne
In article <4na9dm$k...@netnews.upenn.edu>,
Matthew P Wiener <wee...@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu> wrote:
>In article <4n8o7g$j...@nezsdc.fujitsu.co.nz>, derek@nezsdc (Derek Tearne) writes:
>
>The point being that developmentally-disabled _is_ specific, and I have
>not used such specific references.
So, developmentally-disabled is specific in a way that 'retard' isn't.
Oh. I see. It's all very clear now.
>>To dismiss someone as a 'retard' when they are clearly simply disagreeing
>>with one is insulting and derogatory.
>
>Correct. I don't do that.
Ah. You use the term merely as an insult intended to imply that the
person on the receiving end of said insult is, what?
Developmentally-disabled? Insulted?
>>To dismiss someone as a 'retard' if they are indeed somehow mentally
>>deficient is particularly impolite.
>
>Indeed it is. I am regularly impolite to stupid people who proudly wave
>their stupidity around.
Oh, and all this time I thought you were just exhibiting the kind of
behaviour usually ascribed to reasonably small children. You know,
the kind of small children who run around calling other children names.
Need I point out that the most obvious example of 'proud stupidity
waving' on this newsgropu is exhibited by one particular poster and
his child-like repetition of meaningless phrases such as "Like, duh" and
"Grow up, retard".
Phil Edwards
Could I just add at this point, well, how shall I put it...
Goodbye.
Not that I'm reeling from Matthew's stinging invective (like, duh),
or suffering sustained ego-bruising from repeated challenges to my
mastery of British English usage and pronunciation
or retiring in distaste for the longevity of a thread with the word
"maggotbrain" in the title
- I've just got to get some work done.
Phil "never even realised it was a word" Edwards
Doug Reade
he...@panix.com (Harry MF Teasley) did lift his hand and create:
>
(a truly awesome and pointed lesson in word-wizardry which will of course
be wasted upon the Monomaniacal Matthew P.)
Harry, you are indeed incredible. I thought I had a bit of talent as a
wordslinger, but I stand bare-headed and teary-eyed.
You know, of course, that it won't do a bit of good.
But it was sure cathartic to read!
Doug Reade
Ewan Kirk
In Article <4nfjrh$d...@netnews.upenn.edu> Matthew P Wiener
bores the arse off us by once again writing:
> [ snip ] retards.
Na nah nee nah na. Matthew's a pathetic retard. Na nah nee nah na. Matthew's
a pathetic retard.
Ewan "maybe he'll understand this and fuck off" Kirk.
--E.
Bo Bradham
Phil Edwards <new...@dircon.co.uk> wrote:
>Could I just add at this point, well, how shall I put it...
>
>Goodbye.
>
>Not that I'm reeling from Matthew's stinging invective (like, duh),
>or suffering sustained ego-bruising from repeated challenges to my
>mastery of British English usage and pronunciation
Since this appears to be a reference to some stuff I've posted
I'll respond.
Phil Edwards posted a definition of "old hat" which was news not
only to me but to the two dictionaries I consulted. I asked him
to post examples of the usage he was talking about. And it was
indeed "repeated" because his first followup shed no light and I
asked for details. Any "ego-bruising" sustained in the exchange
was not due to any malice on my part. If someone cannot stand a
challenge to an assertion made on afu, this is not the newsgroup
for that person.
Bo "on the internet no one knows you have an accent" Bradham
--
"We consider that any man who can fiddle all through one of
those Virginia Reels without losing his grip, may be depended
upon in any kind of musical emergency."
-- Mark Twain.
Matthew P Wiener
In article <4ngdkv$d...@panix2.panix.com>, het3@panix (Harry MF Teasley) writes:
>Matthew P Wiener bequeathed:
>> Yet I see no decency patrol operating here. So I conclude that pointing
>> out that something *I* say is offensive is not done out of concern of
>> potential offensiveness. Hence my question.
>Valid question (who'da thunk it?), and it deserves a valid answer.
>Essentially, you are not funny while being offensive.
Ah. So in AFU massive racism is approved, so long as it is *funny* racism?
> You showed us that
>you often have nothing to say other than "retard", "Like, duh", and "Yawn".
And I often do.
>When it comes to a verbal sparring partner, you have no place in the ring.
And when it comes to mathematics, you are a provable zero. But you don't
let that stop you, now do you?
>You, on the other hand, have endeared yourself to no one,
So you say.
> have shown no
>ability to laugh at yourself,
So you say.
> have shown no creativity with words,
So you say.
> and are
>generally thought to be a poor sport.
Awww.
> Your loud whining about how you're
>unfairly put-upon here only makes the sensible wonder why you bother
>posting here at all.
I don't care if it's _fair_ or not. But if it's not, I'll point it out.
Matthew P Wiener
In article <4ngtp0$n...@nezsdc.fujitsu.co.nz>, derek@nezsdc (Derek Tearne) writes:
>In article <4na9dm$k...@netnews.upenn.edu>,
>Matthew P Wiener <wee...@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu> wrote:
>>In article <4n8o7g$j...@nezsdc.fujitsu.co.nz>, derek@nezsdc (Derek Tearne) writes:
>>The point being that developmentally-disabled _is_ specific, and I have
>>not used such specific references.
>So, developmentally-disabled is specific in a way that 'retard' isn't.
Yes.
>Oh. I see. It's all very clear now.
Good.
>>>To dismiss someone as a 'retard' when they are clearly simply disagreeing
>>>with one is insulting and derogatory.
>>Correct. I don't do that.
>Ah. You use the term merely as an insult intended to imply that the
>person on the receiving end of said insult is, what?
>Developmentally-disabled? Insulted?
No. Very very very stupid.
>>>To dismiss someone as a 'retard' if they are indeed somehow mentally
>>>deficient is particularly impolite.
>>Indeed it is. I am regularly impolite to stupid people who proudly wave
>>their stupidity around.
>Oh, and all this time I thought you were just exhibiting the kind of
>behaviour usually ascribed to reasonably small children. You know,
>the kind of small children who run around calling other children names.
Try reading things more carefully.
>Need I point out that the most obvious example of 'proud stupidity
>waving' on this newsgropu is exhibited by one particular poster and
>his child-like repetition of meaningless phrases such as "Like, duh" and
>"Grow up, retard".
You'll have to explain how that constitutes waving my stupidity around.
Matthew Rabuzzi
In an otherwise brilliantly bilious blast of billingsgate,
Harry MF Teasley <he...@panix.com> quotes himself:
: invective-spouting facist sheet-and-pointy-hat-wearing backwards manic
What's wrong with being 'facist'? I'm rather attached to mine; heck,
some of us even have two!
: Harry "show some class" Teasley
Matthew "and a little TLC, of LaFace Records" Rabuzzi
Derek Tearne
In article <4ni7ed$3...@netnews.upenn.edu>,
Because, as every teacher and ex-student knows, the most stupid person
in any given situation is inevitably the one running around and saying
"You are all stupid".
Is that clear now?
Ted Rosen
wee...@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener) wrote:
>In article <4ngtp0$n...@nezsdc.fujitsu.co.nz>, derek@nezsdc (Derek Tearne) writes:
>>Need I point out that the most obvious example of 'proud stupidity
>>waving' on this newsgropu is exhibited by one particular poster and
>>his child-like repetition of meaningless phrases such as "Like, duh" and
>>"Grow up, retard".
>You'll have to explain how that constitutes waving my stupidity around.
I'll explain: littering a directed argument with childish expletives
in an effort (usually failed) to intimidate the detractor demonstrates
an unforgivable lack of wit. Since this forum requires knowledge and
intelligence to be demonstrated through a mastery of language, your
usage of grade-school ad-hominems betrays your lack of said intellect
and shows the entire world (all eyes on this NG, anyway) how stupid
you are.
Your ignorance of your own stupidity (as outlined in your above post)
cements the objective observer's (myself) disdain for you and the
value of your posts.
Usenet is a forum in which you have all the time in the world to
formulate your opinion and format it in readable, cogent language.
Perhaps your interests would be better appreciated and received in
IRC.
You retard.
- TR
Matthew P Wiener
In article <4njm8p$c...@nezsdc.fujitsu.co.nz>, derek@nezsdc (Derek Tearne) writes:
>In article <4ni7ed$3...@netnews.upenn.edu>,
>Matthew P Wiener <wee...@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu> wrote:
>>>Need I point out that the most obvious example of 'proud stupidity
>>>waving' on this newsgropu is exhibited by one particular poster and
>>>his child-like repetition of meaningless phrases such as "Like, duh" and
>>>"Grow up, retard".
>>You'll have to explain how that constitutes waving my stupidity around.
>Because, as every teacher and ex-student knows, the most stupid person
>in any given situation is inevitably the one running around and saying
>"You are all stupid".
As a former teacher and ex-student, I have never heard the above.
>Is that clear now?
No.