Re: A typical scientist? (Re: Evidence . . . .
Gil Hardwick (gil@landmark.iinet.net.au)
Wed, 24 May 1995 02:12:39 GMT
In article <3prgn6$5ia@manuel.anu.edu.au>, Andrew Christy (christy@rschp2.anu.edu.au) writes:
>Your irrational, xenophobic burblings are of no relevance to sci.astro.
>You claim to be reading and writing on sci.anthro, and wonder why we
>get annoyed with you. In fact, you are cross-posting to four different
>groups, and could easily remedy the situation if you chose. Why you
>persist in sticking around and being abusive escapes me. Maybe you've
>driven away all your non-virtual colleagues and only have e-abuse left
>as an outlet for your spleen. Sad.
Surely, such fun has never been deemed rational Andrew. Odd how you
chose to define the irrational as irrational, yet find it somehow
problematic.
Irrational, xenophobic burblings? Not at all, simply exchanging insult
for insult, since the people over there have chosen those rules to be
the norm for Usenet behaviour.
Now, to the matter at hand. At no time have I set the list of groups
for cross posting. Like you, I merely respond accordingly. Unlike
you, I don't whinge and moan about it, just taking it into my stride
and accepting it as part of the game.
You yourself could as easily "remedy the situation if you choose" of
your own volition. That you insist that I am the one responsible, I
could take as an honour I suppose in being granted such leadership
and authority here, but I really couldn't be bothered that much with
such tripe.
You yourself could as easily see that maybe I wonder why all you
people stick around being so abusive, except that I am far more
easygoing, plainly, than you lot.
That you drive away all your colleagues is surely a problem you'll have
to sort out yourselves sometime down the track, assuming that it might
worry you so.
Yes?
>Just in case you have a dyslexia problem, I'll remind you that the word
>'anthropology' does not have 's' as its second letter.
And neither does "astrology" have an "n" as its second letter. So why
do you bother continuing to x-post your crud drivel to here?
>Hope this helps,
Help what? You achieve nothing more than to provide me with yet more
opportunity to suggest that you might kindly remove the beam from
thine own eye . . .
|