Posted by Archimedes' Lever on 08/02/07 12:22

On Thu, 02 Aug 2007 05:28:56 -0400, Derek Janssen
<ejanss@nospam.comcast.net> wrote:

>Archimedes' Lever wrote:
>> On Wed, 01 Aug 2007 16:43:39 GMT, "Thomas G. Marshall"
>> <tgm2tothe10thpower@replacetextwithnumber.hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>
>>>Yes, he spoke of something that was covered. But your response is far worse
>>>and far more dammaging to the ng.
>>
>>
>> Your unsolicited assessment is worse still.
>>
>>>If you want people to start taking you seriously,
>>
>>
>> I could give a shit about your assessments.
>>
>>>and I'm guessing to stop
>>>killfiling you, you should consider stopping the unsolicited ad hominem.
>>>
>>
>> ALL ad hominem is always unsolicited, idiot.
>
>(Oh, that's the other thing:
>
>One of the reasons his posting is so prolific is that he tends to have
>the "Paragraph context" comprehension of a chihuahua on espresso--
>And not only will he believe that the last words to appear in a sentence
>are what the discussion is now 110% about, he will also attack it with
>the exact same adrenaline rush, as if he believed everyone else was now
>talking about it.
>
>For example, if you were to say that understanding HDMI was "as easy as
>falling off a log", you could expect in five minutes his post of "What
>do you know about logs?--Only a total uncoordinated retard falls off of
>them! Do you know how long I've been practicing at staying on top of
>logs? I was logrollling in the Lumberjack games when you were still
>watching RCA!", etc...
>
>Derek Janssen (Comprehension vs. Impulse to talk--There *is* a reason
>why they ask those questions on the Verbal SAT)

You're an idiot.

[Back to original message]