XPost: sci.astro, sci.physics, sci.space.policy
In sci.physics Fred J. McCall wrote:
> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>
>>In sci.physics Fred J. McCall wrote:
>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>
>>>>In sci.physics Fred J. McCall wrote:
>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>In sci.physics Fred J. McCall wrote:
>>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>In sci.physics Fred J. McCall wrote:
>>>>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>In sci.physics Fred J. McCall wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>In sci.physics Doc O'Leary
wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> For your reference, records indicate that
>>>>>>>>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In sci.physics Doc O'Leary
wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > I really can?t be bothered to figure out the messes you get
yourself
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > into. You?ll have to pay me if you want me to do your tech
support.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > :-)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Unreadable and it is not a utf-8 issue.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> [rest of support request snipped]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Have you sent me a check? If so, you?re going to have to wait
until I
>>>>>>>>>>>>> can cash it. If not, take your 1980s tech woes elsewhere.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>The solution on my end is simple; ignore posts that don't adhere
to the RFC.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Where is it non-compliant. Since it looks fine to everyone but
you,
>>>>>>>>>>> are you sure it isn't YOUR end that is not RFC compliant?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Rean the RFC.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> OK. Your reception is non-compliant.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Bile spewing idiot.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So your complaint that his transmission is non-compliant in the face
>>>>>>> of it looking fine to everyone but you would be what?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>When was your poll taken to determine the percentage of people that see
>>>>>>those characters as a single quote?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Why are you the only one complaining, Jim?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Only one to notice.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, that's what I've said, but you wanted to argue with me about it.
>>> Nobody else sees it, Jim. It's just YOU.
>>>
>>
>>And your poll was taken when, space cadet, or are you claiming to be
>>able to read minds now?
>>
>
> You can't even AGREE with Jimp the Simp Chimp without him wanting to
> argue. Chimp, *YOU* said "Only one to notice" in response to my
> asking you why you were the only one complaining. I agreed with your
> response and now you want to know when *I* ran a poll? When did YOU
> run a poll, dipshit?
What you actually said was "Nobody else sees it...", liar.
Look two sentences above your lie.
>>>>
>>>>Only one to make the effort to comment.
>>>>
>>>
>>> And nobody bothered even when you started caterwauling about it? Why
>>> do they all hate you so, Jim?
>>>
>>
>>"caterwauling"?
>>
>
> Look it up. I'll try to restrict myself to one syllable words in
> future so that perhaps you can follow along.
>
>>
>>If anyone is caterwauling it is you, going on and on and on and on and on
>>about something that has nothing to do with you.
>>
>
> Perhaps if you actually answered the questions instead of ducking
> them? Just a thought.
If anyone is caterwauling it is you, going on and on and on and on and on
about something that has nothing to do with you.
>>>>A statement of fact is not a complaint.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Really? On what planet?
>>
>>All of them.
>>
>
> Bullshit. Are you stupid or are you a liar?
>
>>
>>
>>> Let me help you out. "This meat is overcooked." Assuming the meat
>>> actually is overcooked, that's a statement of fact. It's also a
>>> complaint about the state of the meat.
>>>
>>
>>Only to the thin skinned and ultra sensitive, which fits you very well.
>>
>
> So it's stupid and you don't know the meaning of the word 'complaint'.
> So what does 'complaint' mean on Planet Chimp? Here on Earth where
> English speaking humans live it means "a statement that a situation is
> unsatisfactory". You know, like the overdone meat isn't satisfactory.
>
>>> Now tell me again how a "statement of fact is not a complaint".
>>
>>A statement of fact is not a complaint.
>>
>
> You're stupid. You seem to think that a complaint must be untrue.
Nope, but you seem to think a statement of fact MUST be a complaint.
>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Why do you care so much that you keep going on about it?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Because I think it gives great insight into how your head works (or
>>>>> doesn't). You're the only one complaining, yet you insist that the
>>>>> problem must be at his end. Typical of you. Jim is never wrong; it's
>>>>> always the other guy.
>>>>
>>>>And you are the only school yard bully going on and on and on and on
>>>>about it.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Why did you bring it up?
>>>>
>>>>Because reading his posts were annoying, but I have solved that problem.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yet here you are, still caterwauling about it.
>>
>>You are the one going on and on and on and on and on about something
>>that has absolutely nothing to do with you.
>>
>
> You 'solved the problem' (from your perspective, which solution is to
> simply steadfastly ignore that part of reality; very like your usual
> 'solution' to things). So why are you still wanking on about it?
>
>>
>>If anyone is caterwauling it is you.
>>
>
> Yeah, Chimp. It's always someone else and never you...
You are the one going on and on and on and on and on about something
that has absolutely nothing to do with you.
--
Jim Pennino
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
