Re: The case for and against genius

From: Tiny Human Ferret (ixnayamspay_klaatu_at_earthops.net)
Date: 10/17/04 

Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 18:58:42 -0400

jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
> In article <_KOdnd9FS5-VH-_cRVn-hQ@rcn.net>, jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
>
>>In article <41727BBA.2070607@earthops.net>,
>> Tiny Human Ferret <ixnayamspay_klaatu@earthops.net> wrote:
>>
>>>jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
>>>
>>>>In article <41718241.8070601@earthops.net>,
>>>> Tiny Human Ferret <ixnayamspay_klaatu@earthops.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Morituri-Max wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Fabrizio J. Bonsignore wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>><snips>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>In fact, all of them had a very genial idea, am I right?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>genial?
>>>>>
>>>>>Never let an ESOL student use a spell checker or you will get really
>>>>>silly output.
>>>>>
>>>>>Actually, that might explain half of his posts.
>>>>>
>>>>>Someone just started typing randomly and then ran it through the
>>>>>spellchecker numerous times, randomly selecting words from the choices
>>>>>lists presented when something ambiguous fails the spellcheck.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Have you used the assumption that English is not the poster's
>>>>first writing language? Genial is an obvious word to write
>>>>in this case.
>>>
>>>So, one might think from context, might have been "general".
>>
>>Nope. I considered that word and rejected based on the context. :-)
>>We must think differently.
>>
>>
>>>>I'm getting so fucking fed up with people who judge the thinking
>>>>ability of other people just because they don't act and talk
>>>>like Hollywood superstars.
>>>
>>>Try looking at some of "Fabrizio"'s other recent postings.
>>
>>It is possible that the kid is a kook. The subject matter
>>interests me and I'm dealing with an aspect of it in another
>>newsgroup in trying to solve a problem we have.
>>
>>Now, I accept that it certainly is possible that the OP is
>>unreasonable. Personal attacks are not my method of arguing.
>>Personal attacks were simply not allowed when we did our
>>arguing at work; it's a waste of time and does nothing towards
>>solving nor resolving the disagreement.
>>
>>Pissing on the use of a word and ignoring the issue isn't
>>production and can be viewed as intentionally counterproductive.
>>Now, I interpreted your post as an attempt to be intentionally
>>counterproductive. The probability of my interpretation being
>> wrong is 95%.
>
> ^NOT^
>
> ***. I keep dropping my nots. NOT wrong =95%.

Now, that's "genial" of you! ;)

"Fabrizio" is having a lot of fun crossposting into a lot of places
where he is both annoying, and dominating local traffic in the newsgroup.

I have even sunk so low as to Meow him, but nobody else is helping and
he's decided to ignore it.

FWIW just because he's a kook doesn't mean he's unintelligent, or not
able to help you with your problem. 

-- 
The incapacity of a weak and distracted government may
often assume the appearance, and produce the effects,
of a treasonable correspondence with the public enemy.
                   --Gibbon, "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire"