XPost: alt.religion.kibology, alt.webtrance, alt.slack   
   From: rescyou@spro.net   
      
   On Tue, 06 Jan 2004 09:09:32 GMT, alias    
   wrote:   
      
   >>> > I'm afraid that's not entirely possible. I could end up in there at any   
   >>> > time.   
   >>>   
   >>> well then wind up there.. by all means.. but knock off the crossposting   
   >>> ; )   
   >>   
   >> I don't blame you for the reaction.   
   >   
   >eh. the proper reaction is to just killfile u all.. and i will.   
      
   Surrrrrre you will.   
      
   > but i   
   >was bored.. damned sunday nights, get me into no end of trouble.   
   >   
   >[snip]   
   >   
   >>> > I can't really acknowledge you. You use "u" as a homonym for "you."   
   >>   
   >> Well, all of some kind of kids, anyway. I can understand some   
   >> abbreviations, I tell you. I mean, I use YHBT a lot, as well as YHL and   
   >> HAND. Which are acronyms but that's BESIDE THE POINT. Using one letter   
   >> as an abbreviation for a three letter word is just laziness, I tell ya.   
   >>   
   >   
   >actually.. clinging to unnecessary tradition.. thats laziness.   
   >my spelling conventions are a concession to thrift and function.   
      
   "A concession to thrift and function"? Precision and clarity in the   
   use of language is apparently also an "unnecessary tradition." Of   
   course, you could always enlighten us as to what that phrase means.   
      
   > there   
   >is no functional difference between "you" and "u" .. the only difference   
   >is that one spelling is accepted as "conventionally correct" and the   
   >other is not, as of yet.   
      
   I got news for you, son. If "u" ever supplants "you," you will be long   
   dead and turned to dust. But keep tilting at that windmill while you   
   still have a horse to ride.   
      
   >however i think there can be no argument that   
   >my concise spelling is simpler, faster, and equally viable.   
      
   Depends on what you mean by "simpler," "faster" and "viable." Simpler   
   for whom? I assume you mean simpler for you, not for your reader, as I   
   assume you mean "faster" for you. Ah, I think we're starting to get at   
   the heart of the matter. It isn't laziness that lies behind your   
   illiterate use of "u"; it is rudeness and selfishness, instead.   
      
   BTW, I'll leave it to you to tell us which meaning of "viable" you   
   have in mind.   
      
   >ur welcome to follow whatever rules u choose.. however i've watched from   
   >the cheap seats while these rules were formed and i have not been impressed   
   >with the men that create them..   
      
   Please name three of these men that you've been watching as they   
   created these rules.   
      
      
   --   
   Kevin S. Wilson   
   Tech Writer at a University Somewhere in Idaho   
   "You can safely ignore Kevin in order to   
   maximise life's experience." --A. Loon, in alt.religion.kibology   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)