XPost: alt.usenet.kooks, soc.men   
   From: kali@powder.keg   
      
   In , nav navichuck@huckbuck.org said:   
   : Peter wrote:   
   : > In message , nav  writes   
   : >> Peter Hood wrote:   
   : >>> In message , nav  writes   
   : >>>> Peter Hood wrote (regarding Frank):   
   : >>>>   
   : >>>>> I think that you prefer to offer ad hominem rants of an unusually ill   
   : >>>>>  informed, inarticulate strangled nature.   
   : >>>>   
   : >>>> Really? Are you sure??   
   : >>>  No. I don't have a crystal ball.   
   : >>   
   : >> You don't need one to recognize Frank posts ad hominem rants.   
   : >>   
   : >>>>> You've offered no evidence to support your claims only simplistic,   
   : >>>>> glib ad hominem attacks, something that appears to typify your online   
   : >>>>> interactions,   
   : >>>>   
   : >>>> Not happy with Frank's evidence, or rather, lack thereof??   
   : >>>>   
   : >>>>> leading me to question your stability and maturity, to say nothing of   
   : >>>>> your intelligence and awareness.   
   : >>>>   
   : >>>> You wouldn't be making an *argumentum ad hominem* now, would you??   
   : >>>  I merely question. Were it otherwise then I'd make an assertion.   
   : >>   
   : >> And your questions beg an affirmative answer.   
   : >>   
   : >>>> Well, I prefer it this way: Frank is *stoopid*.   
   : >>>>   
   : >>>> Simple, direct, and gets to the point quicker than pretending you're   
   : >>>> the   
   : >>>> next best thing on usenet to the Oxford Union.   
   : >>>  I'm posting in sci.psychology.psychotherapy, a place where   
   : >>> scientists tend to congregate/used to.   
   : >>   
   : >> Then you'd have recognized Frank is no scientist.   
   : >>   
   : >> By the way, nothing you've posted in this thread gives you away as an   
   : >> obvious scientist either.   
   : >   
   : > And your last remark seems to betray the glimmerings of ill informedness   
   : > . It is neither a   
   : > necessary nor a sufficient condition of being a scientist that my posts   
   : > in any specified thread should 'give me away as a scientist' and,   
   : > moreover, any absence of such clues in a post  bright enough to pick up on them> does not mean that I am not such a   
   : > creature.   
   : >   
   : > There is at least one more non sequitur tucked away in your teensy   
   : > little sentence. Perhaps you can find it for me, using the lens of your   
   : > intellect.   
   :   
   : I don't give two bits what you are.   
   : None of your foregoing posts offer anything of value.   
   : With idiots like you operating in the British defense establishment,   
   : another American Lend-Lease program will have to save your Queen.   
   : You are greasy butt-fucking buffoon, deserving of a permanent home   
   : in the bin.   
   :   
   : BUH BYE! ~   
      
   And then again, some things are exactly as they seem to be.   
      
   --   
   Kali   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)