|
|
Posted by Hammerer on 11/11/06 10:10
<aldowatts@yahoo.com> top-posted in message
news:1163226683.200676.52120@f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com
>
> Giving a deeper explanations (completely uneccessary)
> STILL does NOT address the question I asked.
>
You know, I was all ready to deliver a broadside of blustering denials to
that outrageous remark, aldo, until I realised, after re-reading the thread,
that you're quite right. My last post was filled with explanations that went
too deep, and completely uneccessary stuff. What *really* pissed me off
about it was the way it STILL does NOT address the question you asked. I'm
ashamed. Especially considering I've forgotten what the question was. Fuck.
>
> It's obvious that you don't have the knowledge or skills to address
> the question at hand, but have a need to give non-answers anyway.
>
I've never read a better character study, al. I'm such a cad.
>
> You answer is like many that come from techie-wanna-be people. When
> somone tells you they're having trouble with Windows (that has a real
> solution you're unaware of) you suggest they switch for Apple.
>
Nah. I just tell them to fuck off. I'm having a coffee.
>
> Just because you cannot answer the question, doesn't mean there isn't a
real answer.
>
Hey, ald . . . . . . are you a philosopher? You've got that way about
phrasing things . . . . you know, a philosopher way.
>
> You should check out slashdot.org, since you will find many
> people there who share your need to answer questions you don't
> have the knowledge to answer.
>
A beautifully structured sentence, alds. Witty, too. Have you a large one?
>
> Someone out there can answer my question, but it isn't you.
>
Eh, alds? Of course your question isn't me. Think calm thoughts, man.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|