Re: Christmas vs "Holidays"
From: John Woodgate (jmw_at_jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk)
Date: 12/23/04
- Next message: John Woodgate: "Re: Horowitz-Hill: Serious scholarly query"
- Previous message: Rich The Philosophizer: "Re: right hand rule"
- In reply to: Jonathan Kirwan: "Re: Christmas vs "Holidays""
- Next in thread: Jonathan Kirwan: "Re: Christmas vs "Holidays""
- Reply: Jonathan Kirwan: "Re: Christmas vs "Holidays""
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 21:50:01 +0000
I read in sci.electronics.design that Jonathan Kirwan
<jkirwan@easystreet.com> wrote (in <p24ms0917qvj32419nt8a669649l636p1h@4
ax.com>) about 'Christmas vs "Holidays"', on Thu, 23 Dec 2004:
>Sounds like you are frustrated that your internal state of mind isn't
>taken as more than that. I don't really care, though. Just keep it
>where it belongs -- claims about yourself. You have an absolute right
>to that much and I won't take it away from you.
Have you considered that much of what Rich writes just might not be
meant 100% seriously. My problem is identifying which bits ARE meant to
be serious.
-- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. The good news is that nothing is compulsory. The bad news is that everything is prohibited. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk
- Next message: John Woodgate: "Re: Horowitz-Hill: Serious scholarly query"
- Previous message: Rich The Philosophizer: "Re: right hand rule"
- In reply to: Jonathan Kirwan: "Re: Christmas vs "Holidays""
- Next in thread: Jonathan Kirwan: "Re: Christmas vs "Holidays""
- Reply: Jonathan Kirwan: "Re: Christmas vs "Holidays""
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|