From: Scott Sauyet on
David Mark wrote:
> On Jul 30, 7:42 am, Scott Sauyet <scott.sau...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> David Mark wrote:
>>> On Jul 29, 10:00 am, Scott Sauyet <scott.sau...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > David Mark wrote:
>>>> Well. so much for your being done with this discussion, huh?  :-)
>
>>> Ah, the indefatigable match announcer.
>
>> No, I just like to point out inconsistencies and other intellectual
>> dishonesties.
>
> An irritating pundit, basically.  And the use of the term
> "intellectual dishonesties" in this context (or in Usenet in general)
> is beyond laughable.  Do you read your stuff before you post?  Try it
> in front of a mirror.  ;)

*PLONK*

--
Scott
From: David Mark on
On Jul 30, 12:53 pm, Scott Sauyet <scott.sau...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> David Mark wrote:
> > On Jul 30, 7:42 am, Scott Sauyet <scott.sau...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> David Mark wrote:
> >>> On Jul 29, 10:00 am, Scott Sauyet <scott.sau...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> > David Mark wrote:
> >>>> Well. so much for your being done with this discussion, huh?  :-)
>
> >>> Ah, the indefatigable match announcer.
>
> >> No, I just like to point out inconsistencies and other intellectual
> >> dishonesties.
>
> > An irritating pundit, basically.  And the use of the term
> > "intellectual dishonesties" in this context (or in Usenet in general)
> > is beyond laughable.  Do you read your stuff before you post?  Try it
> > in front of a mirror.  ;)
>
> *PLONK*
>

That's the best news I've heard all day. It's not like you respond
often, but it's virtually always irritating and pointless.