* Gareth McCaughan <Gareth.McCaug...@pobox.com> | I think they indicate that Erik interpreted "copy" in a way that I | wouldn't have dreamed of doing and that I bet is very different from what | Zachary actually meant.
I never interpreted it that way. please don't assume that just because someone who is not fluent in American English speculates about what someone else whom he assumes is not fluent in American English because he's not an American would have meant or misunderstood, said someone else actually misunderstood it that way. I actually find such arguments very insulting. if you make this kind of argument with, say, black Americans, whom you assume don't understand a word because they're black, you're a racist. it makes no difference to me if you make it about foreigners or other groups about which you know very little that applies to individuals.
* "Janos Blazi" <jbl...@netsurf.de> | I am trying to imagine your day.
yes, that's the problem. stop doing that, and concentrate on your own life. it seems to require a lot more attention from you than you are currently giving it. I keep saying that most people are more than smart enough to run their own lives, but few people are smart enough to run the lives of others, even though they are increasingly asked to in this here information society, and on the Net, some people seem to want that more than anything else, especially those who fail to run their own lives.
I'd have to conclude that you're not even smart enough to be _able_ to run your own life, Janos, and that's why you're trying to imagine mine, but the imagination of a drooling idiot is no match for reality, and you're so ridiculous in your attempt to tell me what your life is like that you're even surpassing Larry Elwood.
please remember that your imagination is a product of your experiences. it is not always a good idea to broadcast the limits of your imagination.
* David Thornley | I am aware of certain books which cost more, new, than I really want to | pay. I intend to buy used copies. Are you now going to accuse me of | criminal intent?
yes, but only because this is getting criminally stupid.
In article <38B67624.F6006...@eralslk.ericsson.se>, Lars Lundback <eral...@eralslk.ericsson.se> wrote:
>Ole Myren Rohne wrote:
>> In any case, calling Erik Naggum's rewrite "paraphrase" is an >> understatement. He is indeed twisting the thruth at the border of >> malice. I don't see why referring to _all_ of Zachary's posts were >> necessary to establish this.
>Whatever the original intents were, both Zachary's and Erik's, it is a fact the >people interpret words differently. _That_ cannot be hard to admit.
Right. You seem to have a problem with the word "copy" as used over here in the US. We don't use it the way you do.
>Some of you seem to throw in words like 'copy' needlessly, like: "I bought a >copy of Times Magazine." Not always though; buying a copy of a pop record sounds >fishy, so you probably don't say that.
Lots of us use "copy" in that rather Platonic way. I would not hesitate to say that I own a copy of Macintosh Common Lisp. Now, in fact I have several CDs containing various versions (MCL is sold on a subscription basis). Exactly what these are copies of is hard to say, but it is colloquial American English to call this a "copy".
>You may hold that 'copy' is just a filling-in word with no meaning, to be >ignored. But does one buy a 'copy' of MS Word from a PC Shop? No, you buy MS
Yup. Around here you do.
>Word, period. And: "I want to buy a copy of MS Word" - how does that sound? To >me, it means that you want a duplicate of someone's instance of MS Word.
"I want to buy a copy of MS Word" sounds to me like you want to buy a box that says "Microsoft Word" on it, and which contains one or more CD-ROMS, some manuals, and a legitimate license to use the software. If I were referring to a duplicate, I'd refer to a "pirate copy" or some such thing.
>Zachary was unfortunate when he said "copy" in connection with software, >especially when buying and selling it. He was probably not aware of it.
It's hard to see what was so unfortunate about it. He was using a phrase that, to its users, usually implies legitimacy. He additionally used the phrase "licensed copy", IIRC, which certainly implies an intent to have the software with a valid license. Lots of us had no doubt that he was seeking a legitimate transaction.
What was unfortunate about it was that some people don't speak American, misunderstood, and attacked. What was even more unfortunate about it is that some people kept insisting, in their extreme arrogance, that they knew what was meant by an unfamiliar turn of phrase, and kept attacking.
But to
>me, buying a copy means buying a (privately made) duplicate. Erik's questions to >Zachary were pointed, maybe even malicious, but were they unneccessary? I don't >think so.
The polite response, when you suspect possible misinterpretation, is to ask politely what is meant. The polite thing to do, when finding that one has misinterpreted, is to apologize. Erik assumed the worst, and (as of the last I've seen his postings) continues to do so.
* Stig Hemmer <s...@epoksy.pvv.ntnu.no> | I assume that it is the absence of body language, tone of voice | etc. that causes him to "see idiots" on the Net.
I must assume that you lack the ability to read tone in written text and assume that all others suffer from the same problem, and that this causes you to get ideas about how other people behave and think. which is pretty darn sad for you if you realize the long-term consequences.
instead of being intelligent about this and try to figure out if you're right or at least onto something, you don your halo and present your platitudes as relevant information. the problem with you do-gooders who think like this is you have _no_ clue. it's like those lamb-and-lion notions of paradise: people who have so little understanding of how people work and what reality is like that they substitute some _really_ silly notion of "wouldn't it be nice if" for reality and go on to believe in it and wish for it and hope for it. it's actually sickening to watch.
reality doesn't fit the mental imaging power of fools and do-gooders.
* David Thornley | What was unfortunate about it was that some people don't speak American, | misunderstood, and attacked. What was even more unfortunate about it is | that some people kept insisting, in their extreme arrogance, that they | knew what was meant by an unfamiliar turn of phrase, and kept attacking.
what's even more unfortunate is that some people think they know what went on and make no bones about expanding on their personal take on it, even though the core problem they attribute to others is the _mistake_ of thinking they know what went on and not backing down in the presence of counter-evidence. the extreme arrogance of such fools to pretend they have The Answer is indeed the cause of these conflicts. if the arrogant fools had been willing to listen and understand, the number of idoitic assumptions would perhaps have been managably small. instead we have people who are so incredibly thick-headed as to post their imagination of what my days are like, and now David Thornley exceeds this idiotic drivel by some other drivel about somebody misunderstanding "copy". geez.
when people of so little introspective ability make grand projections about the behavior of others, the only result is that we learn how they think, and learn _nothing_ about anything else. it's _really_ pathetic.
| Erik assumed the worst, and (as of the last I've seen his postings) | continues to do so.
and just what would it take to provide you with counter-evidence, David? your willingness to make and post your assumptions from _zero_ evidence goes way beyond what I _questioned_ Zachary about. I don't think you even have the right to complain as long as your assumption-generator is going at full speed.
what actually _amuses_ me in these discussions is just how idiotic the people who complain about my behavior are. it is clearly impossible for these clowns to behave reasonably and intelligently themselves, and so they make all these completely bizarre assumptions and projections and tell me about their personal life (which I have _zero_ interest in!) and how they imagine something they couldn't possibly be correct about. is there any wonder I keep up the flaming of these disgusting _retards_? every time one of these blathering losers proves that he deserves it, I'm proven right: one more true idiot marked out.
what's unfortunate is that the morons think their way of thinking is the only possible way to think, but that's typically what _defines_ a moron.
* "Janos Blazi" <jbl...@netsurf.de> | But he does not behave and this must be told him.
so what would it take for _you_ to realize that _you_ do not behave and need to be told? since you can't imagine being wrong in _your_ idiotic insults and malicious behavior towards me, what makes you think you could _possibly_ have any effect on me? just _how_ stupid can a net.idiot get?
>>>>> "EN" == Erik Naggum <e...@naggum.no> writes:
EN> I don't think you even have the right to complain as long as your EN> assumption-generator is going at full speed.
Hey David, sounds cool! Is it Common Lisp? (Sure, it's ok if it is just Scheme. We're all family here.)
Anyway, #:Erik, now that you mention it, I notice *your* posts are oddly similar, especially of late. I hope you are not cheating -- the Lisp community depends on you for leadership in these uncertain times.
There are people I doubtlessly despise. They lack morals, character, and honesty. They engage in an endless round of finger pointing. In case you can't tell, I'm talking about David Thornley here. There are a number of reasons David isn't telling us as to why he wants to draw unsuspecting dweebs into the orbit of crass unconscionable ideologues. In this letter, I will expose those reasons one-by-one, on the principle that he is hardly the first proponent of pathetic ruffianism and he is unlikely to be the last. His positions have grown into the world's greatest enslavers of human minds, yet we must continue to monitor his cronies and expose them as the lazy disaffected adolescents they are. This sort of vertiginous paradox is well known to most cold-blooded control freaks. The tone of his propositions is so far removed from reality, I find myself questioning what color the sky must be in his world. Continue to appease David, and he will definitely confuse, befuddle, and neutralize public opposition. Thus, in summing up, we can establish the following: 1) David Thornley's long-term stratagems of infiltration and mass propaganda have been so successful that David can now put incoherent meretricious imbeciles on the federal payroll, and 2) we can see the damage that is done when he tries to convince the most corrupt voluptuaries you'll ever see that there is absolutely nothing they can do to better their lot in life besides joining him.
* Marcus G. Daniels | Anyway, #:Erik, now that you mention it, I notice *your* posts are oddly | similar, especially of late.
I apologize for the predictability, but there's so little variation in the basic theme to which I respond. as you may have noticed, the core argument is that I'm not allowed to do X to anyone, but every other person is allowed to do X to me a 100 times over. it gets old quick.
| the Lisp community depends on you for leadership in these uncertain times.
why, thank you. I'm delighted that you, too, join the fan club.
> * Gareth McCaughan <Gareth.McCaug...@pobox.com> > | I think they indicate that Erik interpreted "copy" in a way that I > | wouldn't have dreamed of doing and that I bet is very different from what > | Zachary actually meant.
> I never interpreted it that way. please don't assume that just because > someone who is not fluent in American English speculates about what > someone else whom he assumes is not fluent in American English because > he's not an American would have meant or misunderstood, said someone else > actually misunderstood it that way. I actually find such arguments very > insulting. if you make this kind of argument with, say, black Americans, > whom you assume don't understand a word because they're black, you're a > racist. it makes no difference to me if you make it about foreigners or > other groups about which you know very little that applies to individuals.
> #:Erik
Yes, there were alternative motives. You don't need it, but I'll restate what I wrote once, that your postings may require an extra pass through the compiler, but that they are usually worth the trouble. Like most other elegant tools, Common Lisp needs active and resourceful advocates, and you are certainly one of them.
We had a feud last November. It was nothing unusual but then you wrote to me that sentence... You know what I am talking about. That *did* hurt my feelings. But when I had started I of course did not want to annoy you in any way; I did not even know you existed. After your first responses I was stunned. This has been my first newsgroup and I took every word very seriously.
Then we had an armistice for a few weeks. Then I posted something and somebody else whom I liked started attacking me without any reason as far as I could see. And then you started the battle again and took you whip and gave me an additional stroke.
And then I waited a few weeks and took my whip, etc.
Janos Blazi
A question: what does "net.idiot" mean? Is it a compliment stating that I may be an idiot on the internet but otherwise I may be a kind and gentle person?
Erik Naggum <e...@naggum.no> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag: 3160677171534...@naggum.no...
> * Stig Hemmer <s...@epoksy.pvv.ntnu.no> > | I assume that it is the absence of body language, tone of voice > | etc. that causes him to "see idiots" on the Net.
> I must assume that you lack the ability to read tone in written text and > assume that all others suffer from the same problem, and that this causes > you to get ideas about how other people behave and think. which is > pretty darn sad for you if you realize the long-term consequences.
> instead of being intelligent about this and try to figure out if you're > right or at least onto something, you don your halo and present your > platitudes as relevant information. the problem with you do-gooders who > think like this is you have _no_ clue. it's like those lamb-and-lion > notions of paradise: people who have so little understanding of how > people work and what reality is like that they substitute some _really_ > silly notion of "wouldn't it be nice if" for reality and go on to believe > in it and wish for it and hope for it. it's actually sickening to watch.
> reality doesn't fit the mental imaging power of fools and do-gooders.
> #:Erik
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
> * Stig Hemmer <s...@epoksy.pvv.ntnu.no> > | I assume that it is the absence of body language, tone of voice > | etc. that causes him to "see idiots" on the Net.
> I must assume that you lack the ability to read tone in written text and > assume that all others suffer from the same problem, and that this causes > you to get ideas about how other people behave and think. which is > pretty darn sad for you if you realize the long-term consequences.
> instead of being intelligent about this and try to figure out if you're > right or at least onto something, you don your halo and present your > platitudes as relevant information. the problem with you do-gooders who > think like this is you have _no_ clue. it's like those lamb-and-lion > notions of paradise: people who have so little understanding of how > people work and what reality is like that they substitute some _really_ > silly notion of "wouldn't it be nice if" for reality and go on to believe > in it and wish for it and hope for it. it's actually sickening to watch.
> reality doesn't fit the mental imaging power of fools and do-gooders.
> #:Erik
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
* "Janos Blazi" <jbl...@netsurf.de> | That *did* hurt my feelings.
so having your feelings hurt is actually sufficient for your psychology to break and for you to become psychotic in your revengeful hatred where doling out meaningless, irrational malice is OK to you? for a person who espouses _tolerance_ and has so little of it where it matters, there is really no excuse for anything you have done. be good and die instantly.
| A question: what does "net.idiot" mean? Is it a compliment stating that | I may be an idiot on the internet but otherwise I may be a kind and | gentle person?
yes. to you, _any_ insult is a compliment relative to what you deserve. are you happy now?
> * "Janos Blazi" <jbl...@netsurf.de> > | That *did* hurt my feelings.
> so having your feelings hurt is actually sufficient for your psychology > to break and for you to become psychotic in your revengeful hatred where > doling out meaningless, irrational malice is OK to you? for a person who > espouses _tolerance_ and has so little of it where it matters, there is > really no excuse for anything you have done. be good and die instantly.
> | A question: what does "net.idiot" mean? Is it a compliment stating that > | I may be an idiot on the internet but otherwise I may be a kind and > | gentle person?
> yes. to you, _any_ insult is a compliment relative to what you deserve. > are you happy now?
> #:Erik
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Erik Naggum <e...@naggum.no> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag: 3160739578905...@naggum.no...
> * "Janos Blazi" <jbl...@netsurf.de> > | That *did* hurt my feelings.
> so having your feelings hurt is actually sufficient for your psychology > to break
Most unfortunately it is.
> and for you to become psychotic in your revengeful hatred where > doling out meaningless, irrational malice is OK to you?
Now you have missed an opportunity. "Irrational meaningless malice" would have been better because of the alliteration.
> for a person who > espouses _tolerance_ and has so little of it where it matters,
Well, this is the dilemma of Christianity. To offer the other cheek (I hope this is the right term).
> there is > really no excuse for anything you have done. be good and die instantly.
I thought death penalty was abolished in your country. Do you consider my sins so serious that I deserve to die? Really die? Do you really mean what you say? (The funny thing is: Now some of the regular visitors of this newsgroup will think: "Well said, Erik". Other ones will think: Well, Erik may have exagerated a bit, but not too much, basically it is in order. The life of somebody who has not proved yet that he does not uses other languages, is not very valuable.)
> | A question: what does "net.idiot" mean? Is it a compliment stating that > | I may be an idiot on the internet but otherwise I may be a kind and > | gentle person?
> yes. to you, _any_ insult is a compliment relative to what you deserve. > are you happy now?
Well, to some extent. Do you mean that English is not prepared to describe the true nature of mine? The phenomenon that is called Janos Blazi? On the other hand, your answer was a bit abigous.
J.B.
> #:Erik
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Arne Knut Roev <akr...@online.no> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag: FqnJ8u....@online.no...
> Janos Blazi <jbl...@netsurf.de> wrote: > > Maybe these word by a great German Philosopher refer to me too, so I shall > > stop now.
> Deo Gratias!
How polite! I have never been called this name before! :) Janos Blazi
> -- > Arne Knut Roev <akr...@online.no> Snail: N-6141 ROVDE, Norway > = > The Gates of Hell shall not prevail: > Darkness now; then Light!
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
>>>>> "EN" == Erik Naggum <e...@naggum.no> writes:
EN> as you may have noticed, the core EN> argument is that I'm not allowed to do X to anyone, but every other EN> person is allowed to do X to me a 100 times over. it gets old quick.
Janos Blazi <jbl...@netsurf.de> wrote: > Arne Knut Roev <akr...@online.no> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag: > FqnJ8u....@online.no... >> Janos Blazi <jbl...@netsurf.de> wrote: >> > Maybe these word by a great German Philosopher refer to me too, so I > shall >> > stop now.
>> Deo Gratias!
> How polite! I have never been called this name before! :) > Janos Blazi
Out of the mouth of idiots...
(BTW: Since your other name seems to be something like "Hanns Mayer", are you by any chance residing at Mayerhof ?)
(Quoting from the header: "X-Authenticated-User: hannsmayer")
-- Arne Knut Roev <akr...@online.no> Snail: N-6141 ROVDE, Norway = The Gates of Hell shall not prevail: Darkness now; then Light!
Erik Naggum wrote: > * Gareth McCaughan <Gareth.McCaug...@pobox.com> > | I think they indicate that Erik interpreted "copy" in a way that I > | wouldn't have dreamed of doing and that I bet is very different from what > | Zachary actually meant.
> I never interpreted it that way. please don't assume that just because > someone who is not fluent in American English speculates about what > someone else whom he assumes is not fluent in American English because > he's not an American would have meant or misunderstood, said someone else > actually misunderstood it that way.
I wasn't assuming anything of the kind.
> I actually find such arguments very > insulting. if you make this kind of argument with, say, black Americans, > whom you assume don't understand a word because they're black, you're a > racist. it makes no difference to me if you make it about foreigners or > other groups about which you know very little that applies to individuals.
Fortunately, I'm not doing that. I think you're reading more into the word "copy" than the person who wrote it put there, but I don't think you're doing it because you're Norwegian or anything like that. That would be daft, since all the evidence available to me suggests that you're a more capable user of the English language than most native speakers.
Maybe I'm wrong in my idea of what you thought Zachary meant by using the word "copy". Or maybe you're wrong in your idea of my idea of what you thought he meant. You referred, e.g., to "the fact that he had already established that he was looking for a _copy_ from someone other than Franz Inc." I don't actually know, or claim to know, exactly what you were reading into the word "copy", but the fact that you emphasised it makes it clear to me that you're reading way more into it than I did; to me, the word had essentially zero semantic content beyond distinguishing between the abstract entity (Franz's implementation of CL) and one of its instantiations (a copy of Allegro Common Lisp).
I repeat that I wouldn't dream of assuming that you don't understand the language well because your native country doesn't have English as its official language. I'm not stupid.
-- Gareth McCaughan Gareth.McCaug...@pobox.com sig under construction
Arne Knut Roev <akr...@online.no> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag: Fqnw7x....@online.no...
> Janos Blazi <jbl...@netsurf.de> wrote: > > Arne Knut Roev <akr...@online.no> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag: > > FqnJ8u....@online.no... > >> Janos Blazi <jbl...@netsurf.de> wrote: > >> > Maybe these word by a great German Philosopher refer to me too, so I > > shall > >> > stop now.
> >> Deo Gratias!
> > How polite! I have never been called this name before! :) > > Janos Blazi
> Out of the mouth of idiots...
Thank you.
> (BTW: Since your other name seems to be something like "Hanns Mayer", are > you by any chance residing at Mayerhof ?)
> (Quoting from the header: "X-Authenticated-User: hannsmayer")
From which header are you quoting? And I do not know, what "Mayerhof" means. It could mean a hotel, a farm or something like this. It is a very usual name so there are probably 1000 Mayerhofs in Germany.
Janos Blazi
> -- > Arne Knut Roev <akr...@online.no> Snail: N-6141 ROVDE, Norway > = > The Gates of Hell shall not prevail: > Darkness now; then Light!
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
jo...@mt.lv in "Allegro CL 5.0 Win32" thread lamed thus:
>[We should all jump off the bridge if Erik's > fart smells like telling us to do so.]
I'm amazed at the number of sopho-moronic passionate kiddies who falls for the Naggum juggernaut.
jonis, why don't you take a stroll to your local university library in the isles of philosophy, and gape at the rows of wisdom before you. There are universally recognized learned man in centuries past who are a bit more mature and focused than your comp.lang.lisp hero. (assuming you are into thinking.)
If you are into shit-eating of the Naggum brand, by all means. But don't persuade your peers into it. In particular, i suggest you switch to the Xah brand for a change of taste. It's equally wholesome to your brain, only more zestful.
<jbl...@netsurf.de> wrote: > Hello Doc! Back in town?
> Erik Naggum <e...@naggum.no> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag: > 3160459740154...@naggum.no... >> * "Janos Blazi" <jbl...@netsurf.de> >> | But probably if somebody can prove beyond any doubt that he is mentally >> | insane then he is not responsible for his actions or only responseble for >> | them to some limited extend and will not be persecuted.
>> I'm somewhat disappointed that you have the mental wherewithal to know >> that this would be the only defense for your incredibly malicous postings >> against me for as long as you have been using this newsgroup.
> You are not telling the truth here. In fact when I was new to this newsgroup > (to some extent I am still new to it) I was taken by surprise by the > phenomenon Eric Naggum as everybody else. You started "flameing" me before I > even knew what that word meant.
Because you must have been someone of those whome Erik really dislikes.
> But that was o.k. as I learnt later, it was your way of communicating. I > knew immediately that I was defenseless against you as I am still sticking > to my 19th century ideals of tolerance and freedom of thought and decency > above all.
This is not _my_ business but I would like to say some things as an independant reader of this newsgroup. As far as I have seen, Erik has not attacked anyone with no reason. If you want some do what I did today --- wisit page http://www.naggum.no/erik/ and take take a look. (Although some of those principles were expressed in this newsgroup this week they are all there in one place for everybody to see _and_ learn).
Please don't take this as some kind of offense. I just wanted to clear things up. (I suppose everything looks different from somene not involved in such a hot discussion).
> Then you started blaming me for being a German: [...] > You hinted here, that I was a nazi, though you did not tell it explicitly.
There was no, event remote, hint about it. If you still do not understand then all I can tell you is: people _must_ learn from mistakes especially from other's so they don't make them themselves.
Again, no offense intended.
> I have been watching this newsgroup for months and you are always busy > flameing somebody. Why are you doing this?
I've been reading this newsgroup for just a week and I already know the answer --- Erik is doing hard work of getting world better by showing drooling idiots that they are drooling idiots.
Although those persons did not look like ones at first, after reading Erik's posts it became obvious. Those guys really don't read Erik's posts. They just fight off trying to tell themselves and everybody else that they are not idiots, lunatics or whatever Erik calls them. But they really are (at least they act like that).
Don't take this personally. I just hope there would be more guys like Erik so we could learn more.
> I did not have an argument after our feud last year but after some time I > posted a question an received an answer from Robert Monfera that hurt my > feelings. I told so and then you started attacking me again, though it was > none of your business. So it was you who started again.
Yes, until you get what he tells you. Sorry but the guy is not after you but idiots. It just happened that you looked like one. I don't say you were because I haven't read thos posts but I belive Erik does not attack anyone without reason (if he does we should point out but I havent seen the case this week).
> Erann Gat said in one of his postings that it was hard to believe but in > real life you are a really nice person, Erik. It is really hard to believe.
Not hard at all.
> But tell me: What would you do if we met in real life (at a Lisp conference > for example)?
> Now you have defeated me again. I am writing to you earnestly and still > friendly and now you will respond with you usual filth.
You still have not read what Erik tries to tell you. Well, maybe you deserve it?
> Janos Blazi
P.S. I would like to stress once more --- no offense intended. I just hope you read more carefully next time. People can and _should_ change.
doctor Naggum <e...@naggum.no> wrote: > then do your own piece and cut your own tone. you can't cut mine, but > you might be very surprised, especially considering your personality, > that some people don't go around with thoughts of revenge all the time > and that hatred and malice have no part of _their_ personality, even > though _you_ are filled to the brim with both. > if you don't annoy and > harrass people, they don't react to you, either.
But i annoy and haRass you but you don't react to me. Bummer!
I propound that my artistry for sophistry has surpassed yours, that you are dumbfounded and agape with awe.
> instead you, and Xah > Lee, and this Larry dude recently, behave as if your thinking is you have > a _right_ to annoy me in particular and think that the more you annoy me, > the more right you get in doing whatever it was you were once critized > for, that if you can somehow _prove_ I'm "bad" to people, as opposed to > what I really am: really harsh on stupidity, you don't have to listen to > the arguments I present that you have made some very serious mistakes > that reflect badly on you.
Wow, another elliptical sentence from a discombobulating brain. (with my name in it!)
Erik, if you think i'm here to revenge (if that word applies sensibly) then you need to polish your psychoanalytical mirror and look at me again. Or, perhaps you are getting old and getting sloppy. I -- like you -- don't attack people but ideas and actions. In particular, i specialize in attacking your ideas and actions. In the same sainty spirit of doing the world a favor.
Pal, unburden the chain of moral duty around your neck. Join me in fucking the world purely. I could perfect your penetration power and force of clarity. Together with your technical brawn, we could turn newsgroups into a giant Xah & Naggum shrine. For the first time, i'll show you a hatred you could not have possibly imagined.
Frankly, i'm getting tired of doling out crafts of words. The main purpose i came here spontaneously, was to learn, secondary from having fun. To be perfectly honest, the subconscious ulterior motive being to sail my name a bit with the help of yours. (would this confession earn me more respect or despise?)
It won't go into your warty ears, but i wish you check your puerile verbiage a bit and try not to spew really painful things. People are made of meat, you know? When you are dead, i'll erect an obelisk in my backyard that will say "Doctor Naggum visited this world".
could you please tell me who your programmer is? I would like to report a bug. Or could she supply documentation, and we could then call it a feature ;)
