Re: The Null Problem is a Non-issue

On 2015-02-01, Derek Asirvadem <derek.asirvadem_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> On Saturday, 31 January 2015 12:17:56 +0000, Eric wrote:

> Grasshopper

In the context, an insult.

> You are being ignored ...

Obviously not.

>> So how about listing ...
>
> Imbecile.

Definitely an insult.

> You want yet another enumeration,

Another? I have not received any yet.

> whilst denying that I am the authority that you have sought out to obtain
> that authoritative information from.

Yes, I do deny you are an authority. Where is the evidence that you are? Every question I have asked you was merely trying to find out what you really meant, or where you were coming from.

8>< --------

> And, unlike you, over the age of consent.

As far as I can tell from the information available to me, I am a few years older than you. Or is your statement merely another insult?

> Steps required to make amends and continue our liaison, are as foolows:

"liaison" is hardly the right word.

> 1. Of course, an apology is required

I have been no ruder to you than you have to me.

> 2. you will have to delete your post of 15

Even if I wanted to, I could not. I have already tried to explain this to you, but don't take my word for it, research how Usenet Groups (also known as Newsgroups) actually work (but I will attempt to explain again if you wish).

> 3. post something to the effect that you have retracted your 15 Jan post,
> one line will suffice

Even if I wanted to, it would not do any good because people who have seen the post (and who may still have local copies) may not see any retraction.

> 4. Read my post here of 14 jan, and accept it. Post something to that
> effect

That is an unreasonable condition, because I don't accept all the contents of the post.

> 5. STFU about the content, grasshoppers do not talk back to their
> masters.

You are not my master, I have never said so. I do not see that you have any reason to claim it other than your own amazing and unjustified arrogance.

> It might take you a year to understand all of it ("OMG, there's so
> much!"), like it took you a year on the Null Problem before you agreed
> with me. That's ok. Some people are slower than others. Make the best
> out of what God has given you.

Where are you starting that year from? But yes, I agreed with you about some things, though not due to any persuasion of yours.

> 6. Then I will go away and finish the enumeration, which I dropped on
> 14 jan.

Whatever it was you dropped on 14 Jan, I don't think it was anything I had asked for then, and it was certainly not an answer to the explicit question that I have asked more recently.

> 7. Read it, and accept it. Ask questions, sure, but do not argue.

So, are you God, that I am not allowed to argue with you? Anyway you seem to not understand the difference between a question and an argument sometimes.

> 8. Then I will address your new request for education.

I have never requested education from you.

> Any action from you, other than the above, means you are stuck in your
> deadlock dance, and I will go back to ignoring you.

As is your right.

8>< -------- remaining garbage snipped

Apologies to everyone else for letting this become a flame war.

Eric

-- 
ms fnd in a lbry