Re: To Bob Badour, sorry

Cimode wrote:

> I dont' bother defining prepackaged idiotic concepts and ideas that are
> totally irrelevant to technical exchanges.

But it was you who said "When I point out that I am boorish ?" (June 16, 8:18pm). Didn't you bother to find out what you were pointing out about yourself ? Isn't that a bit superficial ?

> Why don't you assume your position through explicit communication?
> What a hypocrisy!!!
>

Where was the hypocrisy in using the sarcastic term "charm school" for your utterly charmless demeanour ?

> Don't you read!!

Sometimes, I wish I didn't.

> Distates is not relevant..

Very true. Like and dislike are very cheap. Best not be governed by them.

> I exposed his and some of his peer's
> incoherence through sound arguments and proofs...

In the thread I read, you blustered in a similar way to you do on this thread when someone didn't agree with you. There wasn't much coherence to your "arguments".

> I do not give a damn about the person...
>

Perhaps "boor" really is on the mark then: "a person with rude, clumsy manners and little refinement."

> > everything you complain about Bob doing, you have done yourself, and in
> > even worse tones.
>
> BS prove it...I have taken the time to respond to your insults and
> arguments one by one...That's a mark of respect you probably do not
> even deserve!!!
>

My only argument is that you behave in exactly the manner you disapprove of when Bob behaves that way; that makes you some kind of hypocrite. You've never responded to that argument, apart from in your conduct.

> I have not disqualified you as nonsense to evade your stupid posts...

Why thank you.

> I did not call you a crank, a troll, or whatever BS prepapackaged term
> you can put on people to disqualify what *SEEMS* wrong to you...

So far, I haven't called you a crank, a troll, or any other "BS prepapackaged term" (whatever that is). I *have* called you a boor and a hypocrite.

> However I have pointed out to you your incoherence,

Nope.

> your superficiality

Nope.

> and ignorance of RM concepts...
>

So far in this thread, you have said diddley-squat about RM concepts to me. So you can't possibly have pointed out my ignorance of them.

> Jeez who am I talking to?

Calm down, mate. You'll burst something. Received on Sat Jun 17 2006 - 18:29:58 CEST