Re: heavy trolling

From: TimC (tconnors_at_no.astro.spam.swin.accepted.edu.here.au)
Date: 07/23/04 

Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2004 06:06:37 GMT

On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 at 22:22 GMT, Kevin S Wilson (aka Bruce)
  was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
> On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 22:06:01 GMT, "Roger L. Bagula"
> <rlbtftn@netscape.net> wrote:
>
> <something I assume was nonsense, since it was top-posted>
>
>>Lee Rudolph wrote:
>>>
>>> I mean, some of the best trolling I've ever seen consisted
>>> in nothing more than the bland assertion of a patent absurdity.
>>>
>
> Even on Usenet I find it difficult to believe that anyone would be so
> gullible as to respond to a "bland assertion of a patent absudity." If
> the assertion is patently absurd, only a true naif would respond.
> Either that, or an egocentric person with a need to show himself or
> herself as somehow intellectually superior to the poster of the patent
> absurdity. Seems unlikely, though.

There are 4 ways to makes a bland assertion.

And since 4 is prime, I am obviously correct.

> BTW, did you know that google is going to start charging people to use
> its search engine? You'll get some small number of free searches per
> day (I think 10), and after that you have to use Microsoft's Hotmail
> Billing System to pay some sort of micro-payment per search.
> Unbelievable!

The bastards! 

-- 
TimC -- http://astronomy.swin.edu.au/staff/tconnors/
I bet the human brain is a kludge.
                -- Marvin Minsky