Re: Challenge to the behaviourists, #1
From: David Longley (David_at_longley.demon.co.uk)
Date: 09/13/04
- Next message: David Longley: "Re: Challenge to the behaviourists, #1"
- Previous message: David Longley: "Re: Challenge to the behaviourists #2"
- In reply to: Daryl McCullough: "Re: Challenge to the behaviourists, #1"
- Next in thread: Daryl McCullough: "Re: Challenge to the behaviourists, #1"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 22:47:39 +0100
In article <ci51ll010td@drn.newsguy.com>, Daryl McCullough
<daryl@atc-nycorp.com> writes
>David Longley says...
>>Daryl McCullough <daryl@atc-nycorp.com> writes
>
>>>Why don't you just answer Allan's question?
>
>>What makes you think that I haven't
>
>Because if you actually had given an answer, then you would
>quote the answer, rather than calling the question idiotic.
>
>--
>Daryl McCullough
>Ithaca, NY
>
I have quoted, and frequently. I've also referenced, which is another
form of quotation. You simply don't notice, ie you ignore them. This is
why I keep telling you that your remarks are idiotic and that you're
blinded by your presumptions.
-- David Longley
- Next message: David Longley: "Re: Challenge to the behaviourists, #1"
- Previous message: David Longley: "Re: Challenge to the behaviourists #2"
- In reply to: Daryl McCullough: "Re: Challenge to the behaviourists, #1"
- Next in thread: Daryl McCullough: "Re: Challenge to the behaviourists, #1"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
