Re: Bipedalism in different substrates
From: Bob Keeter (rkeeter_at_earthlink.net)
Date: 08/06/04
- Next message: Bob Keeter: "Re: Bipedalism in different substrates"
- Previous message: deowll: "Re: Shellfish Allergies Re: Grass or sand apes"
- In reply to: Pauline M Ross: "Re: Bipedalism in different substrates"
- Next in thread: Pauline M Ross: "Re: Bipedalism in different substrates"
- Reply: Pauline M Ross: "Re: Bipedalism in different substrates"
- Reply: Algis Kuliukas: "Re: Bipedalism in different substrates"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 01:10:19 GMT
"Pauline M Ross" <pmross@ross-software.co.uk> wrote in message
news:ng45h09ta4od7te3unulk1ndegg23pqigm@4ax.com...
snip. . . . .
>
> If you had read Algis's post, you would have seen that he actually
> requested that someone repost it purely so that Jason would see it *in
> its entirety*, and not prefiltered by someone else. I simply did what
> he asked, which I feel is a reasonable request. If Jason really wished
> to ignore Algis, he wouldn't bother to reply at all. As it is, he has
> Algis killfiled, so he never sees Algis's full and detailed responses,
> but he still chooses to reply to posts which have already been edited
> by someone else. I respect Algis's wish that Jason see his posts in
> full. Jason always has the right to ignore them.
Why should I possibly want to read Algis's posting? Fools, idiots and liars
have no reason to seek his devine enlightenment! 8-)
Seriously, if you read my other post, I did sort of point out the somewhat
disingenuous nature of his convoluted posting. I dont play that particular
game of indirectly reading and commenting on Algis' postings. When one
earns ones way into my handy dandy "kill file", it means that I have lost
all interest in what that person has to say. It means that I have come to
the conclusion that the words, good or bad, can not be trusted, that the
person behind the words simply lacks the character to conduct an intelligent
conversation on the time of day much less some aspect of science. Unless
they pass under that quite low threshold, they just dont get in my killfile.
Once they get in. . . . . 8-).
Jason, on the other hand, seems to make a big deal about his "kill file",
but then goes out of his way to circumvent it. To me that felt pretty
shallow and hypocritical; more a matter of posturing and a form of the same
sociopathic behavior I find so offensive in Algis and a couple of others.
Perhaps you can argue that "you are in my killfile" is more or less
offensive than "you are an idiot" or "you are a liar" or whatever, but Im
not sure that they are all that different, at least in the way they were
used between Algis and Jason.
In truth, Jason can ignore, just as I did when I simply snipped out all of
Algis's drivel before I posted my reply to you. But. . . the killfile is so
much cleaner and simpler. Perhaps Im just getting lazy. 8-)
Still, I dont really see a reason in your reply that would justify helping
Algis to circumvent killfiles. Can you explain why you felt compelled to
try to disable the pre-filtering that at least a few of us have decided to
put in place? In Japanese culture, "wa" is a very important concept. Its
loosely translated into English as something akin to "peace of mind" or
perhaps "group harmony". Not being bothered by Algis' babblings instills a
sense of "wa", at least amongst those of us who choose to simply filter
them.
Why did you feel so uncontrollably driven to disturb my "wa"?
Regards
bk
- Next message: Bob Keeter: "Re: Bipedalism in different substrates"
- Previous message: deowll: "Re: Shellfish Allergies Re: Grass or sand apes"
- In reply to: Pauline M Ross: "Re: Bipedalism in different substrates"
- Next in thread: Pauline M Ross: "Re: Bipedalism in different substrates"
- Reply: Pauline M Ross: "Re: Bipedalism in different substrates"
- Reply: Algis Kuliukas: "Re: Bipedalism in different substrates"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|