Chess One wrote:
> "Charlie Wilkes" <charlie_wilkes@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:pan.2008.03.19.15.54.19@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>> Snap poll: What do people think Phil has been smoking?
>>
>> Hmmm. Good question.
>>
>> At one time alt.usenet.kooks bestowed an award called "Illucidious
>> Maximus," to recognize individuals with a flair for incomprehensible
>> writing.
>>
>> From what I have seen, Prof. Innes is without peer in this regard and
>> would be an excellent candidate for this award, if it still exists.
>>
>> Charlie
>
> I suppose one benefit of being an abusenik is that you are free to be
> free of wit and wits. I wonder if other net-stalkers will join you in
> your content-free abuse campaign. If you are too thick to understand
> content, consider that it might not be other people's fault, and you
> might go join Eyeore and in the 100 acre wood where you can be
> bi-polar together.
> OTOH - if you wanted to leave the 'Old English is Dead' school of
> thought, then its necessary to not only understand the 4 words /are/
> old English, but that this has a bearing on the intelligence of the
> person who wrote them. That is to say, not attempting content is, to
> use a psychological word, daft.
>
> Formerly there were 2 areas of discussion here - the amount of Celtic
> language absorbed or adopted or migrated into English, and the other
> to do with County name suffixes. It is insufficient in either case to
> say what you 'believe' or even what others believe, or even what
> whole groups of people conspire together to warm themselves with,
> from the shelter of the 100 acre wood.
>
> Instead you have to make a reasonable try to say how you know what you
> propose. You don't have to be right, but you do need to adequately
> state your perspective.
>
> Otherwise, sadly, it moo moo moo for you [unless you prefer donkey
> noises] or even frogs!~
>
> WILKY; a frog or toad [West]
Can't you find other groups to troll?
--
John Briggs
|
