Re: Sunken Cuban City reply

"Philip Deitiker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 13:15:29 -0500, "Thomas McDonald"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> did some sarious thank'n and scribbled:
>
> >    You are probably right in that I would not generally say what I wrote
> >here to someone's face.  When I can see and talk directly to someone, I
tend
> >to be more willing to dig to see how come they hold ideas such as this.
> >Mostly, it's ignorance and I treat them gently.  However, when they are
not
> >only ignorant but also unwilling to consider another pov, and when they
also
> >cast aspersions on those with whom they disagree (especially when those
> >other persons actually know whereof they speak), then I've been known to
say
> >the unvarnished truth to their faces.
>
> Tom, with all due respect, you take 10 minutes to describe
> the fragrance of bovine feces, when you could just flat up
> say __it stinks and move on. You throw these pearls of
> politeness to pigs. They are not here to farm your
> 'hospitalities' but to farm cretans [not intended to slur
> Cretans] in order to gain some sort or idol worthy status.
>
> Unvarnished is like . . . . . . .
>
>  Take all the data you have on Cuban sunken cities, sell on
> ebay and you might have enough to buy yourself a clue. bye.
>
> [See there, both an ad-hominin and critiquing the lack of
> data in one sentence] Its the Usenet, flame is king, has
> been and will always be king.
>
>
Phil

    My post:    8 lines

    Your post:  12 lines

    Your shorter way is not.

Tom McDonald