XPost: rec.arts.books.tolkien   
   From: mr@sandman.net   
      
   In article ,   
    Paul S. Person  wrote:   
      
   > >> >I won't argue the word "adaptation" with you again. If they're making   
   > >> >an adaptation, they're making an adaptation. There is nothing you can   
   > >> >do about it but comment on the quality of that adaptation.   
   > >>   
   > >> Promises, promises.   
   > >   
   > >Actually, mere facts.   
   >   
   > And yet here you are responding again. And arguing again, in the   
   > snipped part.   
   >   
   > Not just promises -- broken promises.   
   >   
   > Making promises you don't intend to keep is not a good thing to be   
   > doing.   
      
   Are you trying to say that I am arguing with you about the definition   
   of a film adaptation? And if I did, why did you snip that part in your   
   followup?   
      
   I'm beginning to suspect that you're not actually able to maintain a   
   mature debate about this (or any?) subject. Your constant snipping and   
   avoiding parts of the thread just further reinforces this appearance.   
      
      
   --   
   Sandman[.net]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)