This message was posted on Usenet, NOT JLAforums, & on Wed, 14 Jun 2006
11:27:48 -0500, Linonut posted this:
> After takin' a swig o' grog, Erik Funkenbusch belched out this bit o' wisdom:
>
>> On Wed, 14 Jun 2006 01:36:17 -0700, Jim Richardson wrote:
>>
>>> And again, you switch positions, when people asked you why you didn't
>>> respond to blatantly wrong and false statements from windows "advocates"
>>> you stated that not responding, wasn't the same thing as supporting,
>>> now, you are accusing all who don't jump on Roy, of supporting him.
>>>
>>> Make up your fucking mind.
>>
>> I'd say the same. COLA regulars claimed that my silence was tacit
>> approval, now they're trying to claim that their silence isn't.
>>
>> Your turn.
>
> You know that arguments based on one set of posting patterns cannot
> apply to all posting patterns.
>
> There is a fairly diverse set of posters here. Lumping them together
> under rubrics such as "COLA nuts" or "COLA regulars <who do this one thing>"
> is useless, except to irritate.
You've no doubt noticed that Ewik & tab have started using the *same*
things as DFS "COLA nuts" etc. They're playing the "me too" game.
--
www.jlaforums.com steals usenet newsgroup posts, & misleads the public
into thinking the posts come from their own forums. THEY DON'T!
This post was originally posted in a USENET newsgroup.
USENET is free to anyone with a newsreader.
|
|