"dccxxvii" <
the.impe...@gmail.com> writes:
138> Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
138> The above substantiates my true claims, tholen you total liar.
"[Nothing of relevence to OS/2 *advocacy* ....]"
--dccxxvii
More classic hypocrisy from dccxxvii.
138> It's irrelevant to OS/2
Then why did you post it to an OS/2 newsgroup, dccxxvii?
"[Nothing of relevence to OS/2 *advocacy* ....]"
--dccxxvii
More classic hypocrisy from dccxxvii.
138> which is why you should get over it if you want
138> to post on topic.
It was your question, dccxxvii.
"[Nothing of relevence to OS/2 *advocacy* ....]"
--dccxxvii
More classic hypocrisy from dccxxvii.
138> It's you that talked about flying missions over Macho
138> Grande, not me.
Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, dccxxvii?
It was Double-A who talked about flying missions over Macho
Grande, and it was me who asked him what those have to do with
OS/2, dccxxvii.
"[Nothing of relevence to OS/2 *advocacy* ....]"
--dccxxvii
More classic hypocrisy from dccxxvii.
138> I'm suggesting you should post on topic, which is an attempt to
stem
138> your floods of hypocrisy.
Classic erroneous presupposition.
138> You need to learn it first, and I've heard you're an awful
teacher.
What does your hallucination have to do with OS/2, dccxxvii?
"[Nothing of relevence to OS/2 *advocacy* ....]"
--dccxxvii
More classic hypocrisy from dccxxvii.
138> If you comprehended the statement you would have realised I made
no
138> suggestion I would be joining you at your attempts to learn.
"[Nothing of relevence to OS/2 *advocacy* ....]"
--dccxxvii
More classic hypocrisy from dccxxvii.
138> Fine.
"[Nothing of relevence to OS/2 *advocacy* ....]"
--dccxxvii
More classic hypocrisy from dccxxvii.
138> What are you on about now, you're knee is in compulsive jerk mode
so
138> you can't stop yourself from reacting to on topic posts as
stupidly as
138> you do on topic ones.
"[Nothing of relevence to OS/2 *advocacy* ....]"
--dccxxvii
More classic hypocrisy from dccxxvii.
138> Do you think comparisons with OS/2 are off topic.
Do you think comparisons between flying missions over Macho Grande and
OS/2 are on topic, dccxxvii? (At least I know enough to punctuate my
question properly, dccxxvii.)
138> Yet more evidence of your kookery.
Classic erroneous presupposition, and rather ironic as well.
"[Nothing of relevence to OS/2 *advocacy* ....]"
--dccxxvii
More classic hypocrisy from dccxxvii.
138> It's not just me that thinks you're a kook, David.
Still suffering from attribution problems, dccxxvii? "David" hasn't
posted in this newsgroup since January.
"[Nothing of relevence to OS/2 *advocacy* ....]"
--dccxxvii
More classic hypocrisy from dccxxvii.
138> It's not me that has awards for being kooky.
You don't need any to be a kook, dccxxvii.
"[Nothing of relevence to OS/2 *advocacy* ....]"
--dccxxvii
More classic hypocrisy from dccxxvii.
138> No-one takes you seriously, is that why you're
138> so lonely you'll do anything to get people into your group?
What does your question have to do with OS/2, dccxxvii?
"[Nothing of relevence to OS/2 *advocacy* ....]"
--dccxxvii
More classic hypocrisy from dccxxvii.
138 postings later, and you still haven't figured out that I don't
take you seriously, dccxxvii.