Re: Computable functions/reasls: followup.
- From: Bill Taylor <w.taylor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2008 20:27:25 -0700 (PDT)
On Sep 9, 11:39 pm, David C. Ullrich <dullr...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Surely you don't want to look like one of those people who
doesn't come up with replies to comments.
There are some people whose comments are pointless.
(Other than for self-gratification OC.)
I guess your point is that I should be embarrassed
Always. But you never will be. Like a village idiot.
Probably you should just reply with another insult.
Pot; kettle.
b
.
- References:
- Computable functions/reasls: followup.
- From: Bill Taylor
- Re: Computable functions/reasls: followup.
- From: David C . Ullrich
- Re: Computable functions/reasls: followup.
- From: Bill Taylor
- Re: Computable functions/reasls: followup.
- From: David C . Ullrich
- Re: Computable functions/reasls: followup.
- From: Bill Taylor
- Re: Computable functions/reasls: followup.
- From: David C . Ullrich
- Computable functions/reasls: followup.
- Prev by Date: Re: Is there an error in Van Fraassen's paper?
- Next by Date: Re: An argument against modus ponens
- Previous by thread: Re: Computable functions/reasls: followup.
- Next by thread: Re: Computable functions/reasls: followup.
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
