Re: Is the Savannah Theory really dead yet?


"rmacfarl" <rmacfarl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1124411597.711771.202770@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> mclark wrote:
> > "JAE" <jae@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> > news:1124237600.058152.230780@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > Now you further don't impress me
> > > with having any real interest in learning anything, but simply want to
> > > rake much. Goodbye, schmuck.
> >
> > Oh, BTW ***, earlier you were casting about for a
> > definition of the word <plonk>. I can't believe you're
> > that stupid but if you are, the above "Goodbye, schmuck"
> > would be it.
> >
> > Don't worry Bucky, I'll always be here for you....
>
> A while back, I wrote:
>
> "
> ...
> Algis won't like my criticisms, and I don't propose to engage yet
> again in a game of claim and counter-claim with him over them, because
> I and others have done it before, and it is ultimately futile trying
> to engage in dialogue with a closed mind. Perhaps that is not the same
> with Richard01. We'll see...
> "
>
> We've seen.
>
> I'll leave it to you to explain what plonk means Mclark...
>
> Ross Macfarlane
>

May I just say it is a little more serious than, "Quack, quack, quack?"

Jois


.

Quantcast