Posted by dorayme on 11/26/07 02:30

In article <Xns99F3B36AA17B5boneurhyphe@85.214.90.236>,
Bone Ur <monstersquasher@yahoo.com> wrote:

> dorayme scribed:
>
> > Funny how you, an earthling, so little understand human
> > psychology, pride, investment and the general notion of theory
> > building. No one reasonably competent, if handed the job of
> > fulfilling some of the basic aims of the OP would start with what
> > he has.
>
> So far we agree. But there are 3 of them. Are they all incompetent?
>

I love this "but" of yours. It is the sign of a masterstroke of
reasoning. If a team does something, it does not mean that they
are all responsible for the overall faults of a page. Yawn and
daydream about that - see your impudent remarks below (Officer
White has been despatched with fresh orders. There may be a
slight delay, he has a bad hangover after a Don's party for the
recent oz federal election. He is never in a good mood after
hangovers, do not provoke him. It will be bad enough for you even
if you are nice and offer him a cool iced-lemon drink).

> So you equate "mugging" with expressing an honest opinion.

I can always count on you understanding the least thing.

> As a side note, I think you were more fun when you were dingbatty. Now
> your posts make me yawn alot and daydream about the sweet potato farm in
> Kuala Lumpur.

Look, many very fair points have been made (most recently Sherm
Pendley and rf) that should alert OP of things to think seriously
about. There is nothing wrong with raising honest issues.

[The other day, the main Sydney newspaper carried a story about
Google and streetscaping. Apparently there are Google vans going
around taking pics of Sydney streets. This is not the one, but
similar to what I saw


http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2007/06/04/1180809390551.html


What next! ]

--
dorayme

[Back to original message]