On 06/12/09 21:15, somebody wrote:
> I could buy that, I could even buy the claim that his time is too valuable
> to waste on my arguments, if he did not continue to waste even more time
> trying to argue that his time is too valuable to waste on my arguments. As

	What gave you the idea he is "wasting time"? Are you suggesting you 
know in depth what he takes interest in and what he doesn't? And 
somehow, you know this better than, say, I?

	In any case, you're an equal partner in this - you're continuing to 
argue on the very thing you equate to being a waste of time. Something 
in it for you, presumably.

> it is, the motivation seems to have been to simply derail the actual
> discussion with demagoguery.

Translation: "The people in this newsgroup are too stupid at reading 
comprehension, so I must deign to inform them on what is going on 
regarding Jim Henderson".

	This isn't exactly the best forum to win points by playing the victim.

-- 
Liberal Household: Tresspassers will be lectured!


                     /\  /\               /\  /
                    /  \/  \ u e e n     /  \/  a w a z
                        >>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
                                    anl

Post a reply to this message