XPost: alt.checkmate   
   From: Kenito@Benito.naw   
      
   On Sun, 27 Jul 2025 06:25:18 -0500, "Lane \"Stonehowler\" Waldby"   
    wrote:   
      
   >Kenito Benito wrote:   
   >> On Sat, 26 Jul 2025 07:53:44 -0500, "Lane \"Stonehowler\" Waldby"   
   >>  wrote:   
   >>   
   >> [...]   
   >>   
   >>>>>>         I'd enjoy learning what lies about Jen I've made up and posted.   
   >>>>>> You'll note NO examples are offered. Since none exist, none can be   
   >>>>>> offer for review.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>> But can they be offered?   
   >>>>   
   >>>>        Since none exist, no.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> You should be more comprehensive in your   
   >>>>> judgments.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>        Please explain.   
   >>>   
   >>> Maybe you were discussing jackin' offer because as it stands your   
   >>> sentence is grammatically incorrect.   
   >>   
   >>       Where is it grammatically incorrect?   
   >   
   >Since none exist, none can be   
   > >>>>> offer for review.   
   >   
      
        If you're going to lie about what I posted, DO NOT include the   
   original in your reply.   
      
        You wrote, "But can they be offered?"   
        I replied, "Since none exist, no."   
      
        Maybe you're so DESPERATE you're focusing on an obvious typo from   
   earlier. If you have to focus on a typo, even when the context makes   
   the meaning clear, you already proved you lost.   
      
   >Try read it one hundred times nor maybe it was become evident to your.   
   >I can seen but grammatical error, why will you did have trouble?   
   >   
      
        Your lying about what I posted does not equate to an error of any   
   sort from me. A spelling error is not a grammatical error. I think you   
   know this, but really want to appear mentally ill, for whatever   
   reason, so you are trying this.   
      
   >>> This is no spelling flame, No,   
   >>> it's your grammar.  None can be jackin' offer for review is what you   
   >>> must have meant.  Noted.   
   >>   
   >>       Your attempt to appear mentally ill has, once again, failed. Keep   
   >> trying. You might be able to con someone into believing it.   
   >>   
   >Read the sentence one hundred times and maybe it will become clear.   
   >Otherwise, I just have to say you are an AI because they will never find   
   >an error in what they have written. It parsed the first time, why   
   >wouldn't it continue to?   
      
        Again, your attempt to appear mentally ill has failed. But   
   continue to try. It's obvious it's very important to you that people   
   in these groups see you as mentally ill when you are not.   
      
   --   
   Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons...   
   for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)