"Jim McGinn" <jimmcginn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> "mclark" <biteme@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote
>>>> If you think a monument to your foolishness is an honor,
>>>> Dimmy, you're welcome to it.
>>> I agree it's a monument to *somebody's* foolishness.
>> That would be you, Dimmy. You are, after all, the
>> author of all that shit. I'm merely the one who scraped
>> it all into one pile.
> Considering its complete lack of substance I would be surprised if it was
> anybody else.
Yea, that would surprise me, too. One has come
to expect such drivel from you.
>> I'll have you note, too, that each is
>> carefully selected
> Well, maybe you were too careful.
>> from your usual rain of idiocy in that
>> each reflects an especially crisp irony. Who, for example,
>> having read anything by you, wouldn't be greatly amused
>> by such as this:
>> "You don't build hypotheses on the
>> basis of unsupported conjecture."
>> or this:
>> "It seems to me that all your arguments
>> add up to one big excuse for vagueness."
>> or (my favorite) this:
>> "This is plainly amateurish nonsense."
> Well, far be it from me to pretend to give you advice, but I don't think
> you're getting your message out. Maybe you should include some context
> for these quotes. Or in the least you need to provide some explanation as
> to why you consider these quotes relevant or telling, or whatever it is
> you consider them. Hope this helps. :)
It's not my message, Dimmy, it's yours. Further, no
explanation is necessary since readers of this NG are
quite familiar with your message. Every time you hit
<send>, you provide all the context needed --here's
another one of your favorites:
"Hope this helps"
Savor the irony with me, won't you?
--Dimmy, Jul 31 2002