From: wally@wally.world.net   
      
   On 9/4/05 15:31, in article BE7CD2E7.10E98%SNIT@CABLE0NE.NET.INVALID, "Snit"   
    wrote:   
      
   > "Wally"  stated in post   
   > BE7D87DA.4E01%wally@wally.world.net on 4/8/05 10:24 PM:   
   >   
   >>>> This 'experiment' has not so much taught me something, but reinforced that   
   >>>> which I already suspected.....still never mind! ;=(   
   >>>>   
   >>>> As for meme, I have thanked Rick for his assistance in that matter!   
   >>>>   
   >>> You thanked Rick, but not me... which shows your bias.  :)   
   >>   
   >> Actually NO! What it shows is the fact that I ignored your alleged attempt   
   >> at enlightenment for the simple reason that it was offered in such a   
   >> disingenuous manner   
   >   
   > Rude, perhaps, but disingenuous... no.   
      
   IMO it was!... "a false appearance of frankness" I believe sums up your   
   effort nicely!   
      
   > I even provided you with a good link   
   > that had a good short definition if that is all you wanted, but also had   
   > links to a lot more.   
   >   
   >> , Rick's on the other hand....well....you can see the difference!, I am   
   fully   
   >> aware that this is a 'flame' ng but I fail to see why you need to make every   
   >> comment of yours reflect that fact, it is quite puzzling to me.   
   >   
   > Oh.  If you do not want me to flame you just say so... I kinda figured that   
   > was the point of a flame group.  I even commented on that:   
      
   I know that's what you figured, that is why my comment of..   
      
   " Rick's on the other hand....well....you can see the difference!,"   
      
   Was sure to be wasted on you, again you prove me right, but it was worth a   
   try!   
      
   >     Something dealing with ideas - and therefore likely beyond you   
   >     [remember, this is a flame group...]   
   >   
   > If you could not tell I was using silly flames then that is your problem.   
   >   
   > Hey!  An actual disagreement in the flame group!  Yeah!  Maybe we can have   
   > some genuine flaming... :)   
   >>   
   >>> Actually, have you noticed that the folks in CSMA have stopped trolling me   
   >>> for the most part?   
   >>   
   >> Actually I have witnessed the waning interest in you for some time!   
   >> That would be the predictable outcome for a 'one trick pony', so I am not   
   >> surprised.   
   >   
   > Waning interest?  Er?  The only ones who seem to be posting to me less are   
   > those that were posting inane tolls against me   
      
   Considering these posters represented the bulk of posts to you,  as the   
   majority has stated that they had already kf'd you, again you prove my   
   point....thank you   
      
   > and Rick is still doing   
   > that.  Dawg and Steve Carroll tried to jump in, but they seem to be running   
   > out of steam.  Good.   
      
   You misspelled 'interest'.   
      
   >>>  Sure, Steve C. quotes me in every post, but even there   
   >>> the quote is not even really a bad one - though he likely thinks it is.   
   >>   
   >> I knew you would subscribe to the notion that 'any publicity is good   
   >> publicity' that is the essence of your being.   
   >   
   > Er?  How do you figure?   
      
   Simple you need an audience! Hence your need to use sock puppets or any   
   other dishonest action that takes your fancy, in an effort to provide a   
   spark to suck as many into an exchange with you as possible, this thread is   
   a perfect vehicle to show just how poorly you perform when this ability is   
   withdrawn from you.   
      
   >>> Hard to know if I am loved any more.  :)   
   >>   
   >> Not really!   
   >   
   > Yeah... it is easy to see I am still loved.   
   >   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)