|
|
Posted by Neredbojias on 08/10/07 05:24
Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Fri, 10 Aug 2007 00:59:16
GMT dorayme scribed:
>> Had you been more accurate, you probably could have avoided causing
>> this error in the first place.
>
> You seem not to know the idioms of the English language. I know,
> it is so churlish of me to say this but since you and your shmark
> mate make such pompous remarks about the primacy of English
> conventions, I don't feel too bad. My popularity can hardly get
> worse.
>
> Face it Boji, you consistently fail to understand many things
> because you are a sexist self-engrossed_yet_gross carelessly
> chattering thing.
A bonafide display of a refined man's sexually-elevated probations is
hardly sexist. Now displaying my elevated sex pro bono, -that would be
sexist.
However, my thing doesn't chatter. You must be watching too many of them
adult cartoons on The 'Net.
> There is a common meaning of "fine print" conditions. They are
> the little printed conditions at the bottom that one can barely
> read in newspaper ads. The one ray of hope for readers of a web
> page is to enlarge the text. If this is blocked, then it is
> something I thought worth remarking on at the time. Naturally, I
> should take into account that anything that is said is likely to
> have you idiotically bursting in on and misconstruing whatever
> you can and generally just spewing forth.
>
> Luckily, I have nothing in my nature that is not concise, to the
> point, accurate, troll_less and directly relevant and useful to
> all.
Yes, I'm sure phrases like "shmark mate", "that schmark schmate of
yours", and "schmuck" are most edifying to the majority of those
newsgrouping souls unfortunate enough to encounter your "relevancy"
first-hand.
> It is simply not my fault that the boji in earthlings can
> not always see this.
>
--
Neredbojias
Half lies are worth twice as much as whole lies.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|