><<Why I don't buy Road & Track, item the 1,429th>>
>Someone desperately needs a hug.
"Someone" needs the least pretense to objectivity...
...But if you ever respond to the substance of a post you disagree
with, rather than merely slagging off the poster, we'd know your
account was being spoofed.
MC - 30 Sep 2004 14:53 GMT
>><<Why I don't buy Road & Track, item the 1,429th>>
>>Someone desperately needs a hug.
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> with, rather than merely slagging off the poster, we'd know your
> account was being spoofed.
I believe it is her habit to *thoroughly* slag off the poster - not to
mention responding on a point-by-point basis most of the time. You
cannot fault her for doing anything on a "merely" basis.
I may now have to don the defense armor myself, but I feel you are
continuing a low-level skirmish here simply for the sake of the
skirmish. Desist, fighter. Wait for a real dragon to come and call you
to battle.
MC
TigerRace1 - 30 Sep 2004 18:44 GMT
<<"Someone" needs the least pretense to objectivity...>>
Objectively speaking, seems pretty clear that you're pretty tense most of the
time.
<<.But if you ever respond to the substance of a post you disagree with, rather
than merely slagging off the poster, we'd know your account was being
spoofed.>>
Maybe if you expressed an opinion that wasn't mired in bile, anger and disdain,
then there would be some *substance* worthy of responding to. I have no problem
disagreeing with people and I love a good debate, but there is no sense in
discussing most things with you as you feel the need to argue, not just
disagree. Your contempt for all opinions other than your own blisters the
screen. You're one of those annoying facts of life online that sux the
*discussion* out of a discussion group. Lighten up already.
C.
F2004: 14 of 16* - 01 Oct 2004 01:54 GMT
><<"Someone" needs the least pretense to objectivity...>>
>Objectively speaking, seems pretty clear that you're pretty tense most of the
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
>screen. You're one of those annoying facts of life online that sux the
>*discussion* out of a discussion group. Lighten up already.
Listen, "Sweetie", I was just pointing out another glaring error on
the part of R&T... An occurrence I find lamentably frequent and
ultimately devaluing.
*You* made it something psychiatric.
...I'm guessing inkblots _don't_ all look like 'Georgia O'Keefe's' to
*you*.
TigerRace1 - 01 Oct 2004 19:59 GMT
<<Listen, "Sweetie">>
Is referring to me by Mikey's cat's name supposed to somehow insult me or put
me in my place? Too bad, it really just confirms what I was saying about your
need to be contemptuous rather than insightful.
<<I was just pointing out another glaring error on the part of R&T...>>
It's not what you do, it's the way you do it.
<<*You* made it something psychiatric.>>
You are what you are. I just pointed out how boring it is.
C.
F2004: 14 of 16* - 04 Oct 2004 15:11 GMT
><<*You* made it something psychiatric.>>
>
>You are what you are. I just pointed out how boring it is.
...As averse to tedious cat scratching.
Paul Duffin - 04 Oct 2004 23:28 GMT
>><<*You* made it something psychiatric.>>
>>
>>You are what you are. I just pointed out how boring it is.
>
> ...As averse to tedious cat scratching.
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.....
F2004: 14 of 16* - 05 Oct 2004 18:49 GMT
>>><<*You* made it something psychiatric.>>
>>>
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>
>ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.....
...Exactly.
Paul Duffin - 01 Oct 2004 09:03 GMT
>Lighten up already.
I dunno... first it was Ford over Ferrari, now look....
MCPD ;-)

Signature
Http://www.redmist.freeserve.co.uk (Now featuring the a.a.f. directory)