Posted by Bone Ur on 11/26/07 13:38

Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Mon, 26 Nov 2007 02:30:19
GMT 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).

I happened to mention to a friend of mine that you loved my "but", and he
wants to know if you'll meet him in Macao?

>> So you equate "mugging" with expressing an honest opinion.
>
> I can always count on you understanding the least thing.

Dependability is a virtue oft overlooked in the character of many an
erudite humanitarian.

>> 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.

Of course not. That's what I said. And, as we all know, I'm right.

> [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! ]

Personally, I think that kind of "photography" _is_ an invasion of
privacy. Look at it this way: what if the government was doing it?

--
Bone Ur
Cavemen have formidable pheromones.

[Back to original message]