Re: A Normalization Question

"Tony" <andrewst_at_onetel.net.uk> wrote in message news:c0e3f26e.0407150147.108c951f_at_posting.google.com...
> "Marshall Spight" <mspight_at_dnai.com> wrote in message
news:<IMjJc.81437$%_6.7213_at_attbi_s01>...
> > "Larry Coon" <lcnospam_at_assist.org> wrote in message
news:40F5B0C4.1948_at_assist.org...
> > >
> > > There are many things about your posts in this thread that
> > > I find stunningly ironic. One is that in your campaign to
> > > eliminate all physical redundancy, you post this same
> > > example over and over and over.
> >
> > Ain't that a hoot!
>
> This thread is futile, because Neo is that strange oxymoron, the
> intelligent idiot. I mean, it must take some intelligence to come up
> with this weird and self-consistent "data model" of his; and yet he
> completely fails to grasp the most rudimentary principles of data.
> Yet Neo's conceit is that ONLY he trully understands data, and
> EVERYONE else is wrong. No matter how many times his errors are
> pointed out and explained, he will NOT get it, because he KNOWS he is
> the only person who really understands and that we are all wrong, so
> he will not listen.

Either that or he is really a psychology/sociology student who is doing a thesis on argument theory, with his question being, "How long can an argument among several prople be extended merely be reiterating the same incorrect position?" Another possibility- he is tyrying to port "Monty Python's, "Argument Clinic" to the web. Received on Thu Jul 15 2004 - 15:05:45 CEST