On Mar 27, 10:13 pm, "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> spun:
> Douglas Berry <penguin_...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >> I thought mine was a reasonable question, and I still do. What do
> >> you think is unreasonable about it?
> > It's tone.
>
> It's text, not speech. Any tone is in the mind of the reader, not
> the writer.
Ignorant bullshit. Any good writer well understands that the mix and
order of words does set a lot of deliberate tone to any written item.
> > Rather than simply asking about methods of getting to the con for
> > people who don't drive, you accused the concom of being in some sort
> > of conspiracy to deprive you of your ability to attend.
>
> I didn't accuse anyone of anything.
" I never had sex with that woman. " Time to impeach... you.
IOW, yeah, you did indeed make such an accusation. You merely and
cowardly tried to camouflage it in the form of a LOADED " question ".
> I am on good terms with the Philcon concom.
Well, we'll see. I'll suggest to my wife, who has been a Philcon
concom
member, and who was a PSFS officer, that she forward a copy of your
" only for motorist " post to them...
She just replied to me that <sarcasm mode now on> "Yes, Philcon is
for
motorists only, because motorists actually spend money, and I want
the
Pocket Dragon vendor to return ! " <sarcasm mod now off>
> > You won't get this of course, because as I've learned, the world is
> > supposed to bend to your wishes.
>
> You have a vivid imagination.
Even if he did, hes spot on target about what you said. As am I.
2-1, you lose.
> That's a good thing, but only if you
> can distinguish between your imagination and reality.
<Massive Loon Projection>
Says the fool who, never having had/driven a car, wants to lecture
people about transport issues that involve cars and roads...
Amazing; Daft as a bag of retarded self absorbed rocks, but still
amazing.
Andre
|
