Re: RDBMS using hashtables

> On Thursday, 4 September 2014 05:00:11 UTC+10, Eric wrote:
>
> Patronising bastard!

1. Ok, so you are proving yet again, for the umpteenth time, that you are a disgusting liar. Read the posts, slowly, in chronological order. Especially your own posts, do not skip them. Try not to forget the sequence. You asked me:

> On Wednesday, 3 September 2014 05:21:34 UTC+10, Eric wrote:
>
> What the bloody hell are you on about, Derek? I didn't write any of this, especially not on that date.

And subsequent to your request, I answered. "patronising" or condescending or merciful or charitable, is false, I was answering your request directly.

2.
> Patronising bastard!

Once again, you call people names, ad hominem attacks, etc, but you squeal like wounded puppy when you get served some of the same medicine. Pathetic. Hypocrite. Cry baby.

This time, you have soiled yourself so badly, all on your own, I do not need to do anything in response.

3. You have no honour, or courtesy. You demonstrate only the pride of the imbecile. You cannot even admit you own mistakes, even when you have painted them all over the forum, even when they have been pointed out. Pathological denial.

4. I see, I will not be getting any gratitude from you for servicing your request.

5.
> On the evidence ...

Carefully picked and chosen, and the great bulk of the evidence carefully avoided.

6.

< long drawn-out explanations, 
< after the fact of getting simple formatting issues wrong, 
< after the fact of asking me for clarification,
< after the fact of receiving it, 
< after the fact of being corrected,
< snipped >

7.
> Lastly, please allow yourself to get hold of the idea that I do *not*
> want your help or instruction.

Not possible. Stop lying.

The problem is not with me, the problem is with you. Check the evidence. The above quoted statement ( [7] yours) is a stupid self-contradiction. If you ask me for elaboration or clarification or about the technical subject (eg. your quoted statement below [8] ), in and of itself, it proves that you are in a certain specific point of ignorance about that subject, and you are asking a person whom you have chosen, because you have determined that they know more than you about the subject. And that is just direct inference from your question. Unless you are retarded, and there is a lot of evidence for that.

Following that, you receive an answer from the person you asked the question of, and that takes you to a specific new point, one of slightly less ignorance about the subject. The delta between the two points, is defined as education, like it or not. Whether you admit it or not is irrelevant. It is not formal education, but it is education within the scope of this media.

Third, you keep engaging with me, and you keep asking me questions, so by the evidence, you are obsessed with me, you love me to bits, and there is one fragmented part of you which *does* want my help and instruction. So stop lying about it.

I agree, there is another fragmented part of you that screams that you *don't* want the education that the first fragmented part of you keeps asking for. Yeah,sure, you are proving to be various fragmented that are not integrated, therefore disintegrated. Very sad, really. And you keep advertising it on public fora.

8.
> Any questions I have asked were requests
> for elaboration (never provided)

Stop lying. I provided them, but as evidenced in the threads, you did not understand it, you ask further questions. So yet again, you are stuck in your permanent spot, of ignorance, too prideful to accept education. You are stuck, impotent, stalled, at [2.b] in your own "what is a database" thread. And now you are stuck, crippled, broken down, in this thread. Because you scream that you do not want education, while asking for it.

And yes, sure, I eventually stopped giving you the education, because of your self-contradiction and lying. So it is stupid to *keep on* asking questions while at the same time, screaming that you don't want the answer.

9.
> and most of the rest of what I have
> written was statements of disagreement, which you seem unable to cope
> with.

I can cope with it. I just don't waste time responding to every statement of a person who has proven to be both an idiot, and seriously mentally damaged.

9.a. Making a statement that disagrees with something that I stated, does not make your statement a fact. Unless you are seriously mentally ill. For which you have supplied a small and growing mountain of evidece.

9.b. My non-response to your various idiotic statements is not a "proof" that they are true. Unless you are deranged.

9.c. As for your darling expectations that I should respond to your every murmur, burp, and squeal, as I have already explained, and as you are proving yet again, you need the unconditional devotion that a mother has for a retarded child. This is an usenet forum, it is not my job to service those needs.

9.d. And the second reason that I don't answer your every question, gurgle, or sigh, is (I repeat [8]), you were, and you still are doing the magical self-contradictory dance from the asylum, asking a question but screaming that you don't want the answer. No one, not even God, can service such request. Received on Thu Sep 04 2014 - 01:11:56 CEST