On Tue, 14 May 2013 02:09:50 -0700 (PDT), Andre Jute
<
fiul...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>We've noticed. We're deeply envious of someone so ruthlessly
>functional that he doesn't have time for principles.
Thanks. When one is in business for themselves, the balance point
between principles, ethics, doing the "right thing", morality, and the
alternative of self enrichment, is all too common. Envy is a good
first step in the right direction as the remaining 6 deadly sins will
surely follow.
>>and did not have time to
>> make my post any shorter.
>
>You stole that line from, er, Coleridge, Keats or Byron, one of those.
True, but at least I rephrased it to match the occasion. Nothing I do
is ever original and is always based on the work of others. However,
with so common a phrase, that has been recycled in many forms over the
years, I saw no reason to cite my source as it would certainly have
inspired a long and tedious discussion on its origins.
>I don't expect the scumball Gene Daniels aka Datakoll to be perfect,
>I just expect him to be invisible.
Invisible people are perfect. Please consult literature about your
favorite deity for details.
>If he doesn't put himself in my face, I won't know he's there, and
>I won't be tempted to crush his balls, metaphorically speaking of course.
Not metaphorically but more likely virtually. I see it unlikely that
you would visit the US for the purpose.
Usenet readers have an invisibility feature that allows you to render
any undesirable as unworthy of reading by either marking his output as
already read, or deleting it automatically. I suggest you avail
yourself of the technology before resorting to the ways of your
ancestors.
>I've already given it to you, "The iron hand in the velvet glove."
As I suspected, that's highly idiomatic. I've never tried cycling
wearing velvet gloves, but I presume it would be possible if I could
ignore comments on my fashion choices from the other riders. However,
I do have somewhat of an iron grip, mostly from playing piano and
pounding on keyboards.
>I suppose a decent education in the humanities would tell you
>that "inoffensive" is a grossly contrary translation. I don't
>really know how I know, but everyone who went to school with me,
>or to most of my colleges (not the engineering schools), will
>certainly know.
I have little education in the humanities and am not a humanist. The
college I attended emphasized engineering and did its best to ignore
everything else. Humanities and producing "well rounded" graduates
arrived after the college was accredited, which was about 4 years
after I was graduated.
Like all literal translations, idiomatic phrases tend to be fail the
worst. "How do you do" means nothing in France, where the common
greeting translates literally to "How do you carry yourself". As a
card carrying member of the GUM (great unwashed masses), dark ages and
mediaeval idioms mean little to me. If you want to convey the
properly brutal motto, I suggest an accompanying translation into the
vulgar tongue.
>> your motto ...in a language that is not commonly
>> understood and apparently difficult to decode. ... intended to
>> obscure, rather than illuminate.
>
>Nah,
Yea. Of what use is a motto inscribed upon your escutcheon that only
you can understand? You would do better with hieroglyphic symbols.
>you're seeing subtlety where there's nothing full frontal brutality.
Nope. I favor conspiracy theories over Occam's Razor. Simple
explanations and translations are boring, while conspiracy theories
are valued mostly for their entertainment value. In order to produce
a suitable conspiracy theory, I first attempt to guess at the intent,
purpose, and motivations behind your statements, and then
intentionally misinterpret them. The conspiracy theory is then built
on top of the misinterpretation. Hopefully, this will provide you
with a suitable alternative to full frontal brutal writing.
>There's nothing obscure about the purpose of my family motto. It's
>a warning. (...). Probably also a quicker way to raise revenue for
>a small war than tediously collecting taxes from the peasants.
You have a colorful past, some of which seems to have floated to the
surface in your persecution of Mr Daniels. However, I see no
possibilities of generating revenue from said persecution, which would
be sufficient justification for immediate abandonment. I also
question the need for a family motto. My ancestors were a mixture of
Rabbis and livestock thieves, which did fairly well in Poland without
the benefit of a motto. Perhaps your acerbic disposition and ruthless
manner might improve if you abandoned your family motto or modernized
it with something more politically correct.
>> No need. All my other points are presumed to be correct and
>> unassailable.
>Thank you. That's a relief. The night is gone and my work is not
>finished. I shall take that too out on the wretched Daniels, the
>cause of so much wasted time.
Mr Daniels is not Jewish and therefore untrained and unqualified to be
a professional scapegoat. If you need to vent your frustrations or
practice your brutality, there are individuals available who will
provide a more suitable target, for a fee, of course.