I like wabbits!
This is a discussion on I like wabbits! within the AIX Operating System forums, part of the Unix Operating Systems category; --> Art Deco <erfc-1024@usa.net> writes: > :nelohT Still suffering from attribution problems, Deco? >>>>>> Still Non Classic >>>>> That depends ...
| |||||||
| FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
05-29-2008, 10:31 AM
| ||||
| ||||
 Re: I like wabbits! Art Deco <erfc-1024@usa.net> writes: > :nelohT Still suffering from attribution problems, Deco? >>>>>> Still Non Classic >>>>> That depends on your definition of the word "classic", Tholen. >>>> Non sequitur. >>> Sequitur. >> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. > Non sequitur. Another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. > "Substantiation that you regard yourself as a God to be worhsipped [sic] > should be your concern, Deco." > -- David Tholen Classic kookery on your part, Deco: "Out-of-context quotes in your boilerplate spam, Davie, how kooky." --Art Deco      |
|
05-29-2008, 10:31 AM
| |||
| |||
| Re: I like wabbits! Edward M. Kennedy <ei@eio.com> wrote: >"Art Deco" <erfc-1024@usa.net> wrote > >>>>>>> Still Non Classic >>> >>>>>> That depends on your definition of the word "classic", Tholen. >>> >>>>> Non sequitur. >>> >>>> Sequitur. >>> >>>Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. >> >> Non sequitur. > >What does that have to do with wabbits, Deco? I'm getting to that. -- "Substantiation that you regard yourself as a God to be worhsipped [sic] should be your concern, Deco." -- David Tholen |
|
05-29-2008, 10:31 AM
| |||
| |||
| Re: I like wabbits! :nelohT > >>>>>>> Still Non Classic > >>>>>> That depends on your definition of the word "classic", Tholen. > >>>>> Non sequitur. > >>>> Sequitur. > >>> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. > >> Non sequitur. > >Another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. Still non classic. -- "Substantiation that you regard yourself as a God to be worhsipped [sic] should be your concern, Deco." -- David Tholen |
|
05-29-2008, 10:31 AM
| |||
| |||
| Re: I like wabbits! Art Deco <erfc-1024@usa.net> writes: > :nelohT Still suffering from attribution problems, Deco? >>>>>>>> Still Non Classic >>>>>>> That depends on your definition of the word "classic", Tholen. >>>>>> Non sequitur. >>>>> Sequitur. >>>> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. >>> Non sequitur. >> Another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. > Still non classic. Non sequitur. > "Substantiation that you regard yourself as a God to be worhsipped [sic] > should be your concern, Deco." > -- David Tholen Classic kookery on your part, Deco: "Out-of-context quotes in your boilerplate spam, Davie, how kooky." --Art Deco |
|
05-29-2008, 10:31 AM
| |||
| |||
| Re: I like wabbits! Art Deco <erfc-1024@usa.net> writes: > Edward M. Kennedy <ei@eio.com> wrote: >> Art Deco <erfc-1024@usa.net> wrote >>>>>>>> Still Non Classic >>>>>>> That depends on your definition of the word "classic", Tholen. >>>>>> Non sequitur. >>>>> Sequitur. >>>> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. >>> Non sequitur. >> What does that have to do with wabbits, Deco? > I'm getting to that. What's taking so long, Deco? > "Substantiation that you regard yourself as a God to be worhsipped [sic] > should be your concern, Deco." > -- David Tholen Classic kookery on your part, Deco: "Out-of-context quotes in your boilerplate spam, Davie, how kooky." --Art Deco |
|
06-13-2008, 03:14 PM
| |||
| |||
| Re: I like wabbits! :nelohT > >> :nelohT > >>>> :nelohT > >>>>>> :nelohT > >>>>>>>> :nelohT > >>>>>>>>>> :nelohT > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Still Non Classic > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That depends on your definition of the word "classic", Tholen. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Non sequitur. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sequitur. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. > >>>>>>>>>>>> Non sequitur. > >>>>>>>>>>> Another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. > >>>>>>>>>> Still non classic. > >>>>>>>>> Non sequitur. > >>>>>>>> Another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. > >>>>>>> On your part, Deco. > >>>>>> Illogical. > >>>>> I'm well aware that another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim on >>>>> your part is illogical, Deco. No need to tell me about it. > >>>> Still illogical. > >>> I'm well aware that another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim on >>> your part is still illogical, Deco. No need to tell me about it. > >> I'm well aware that you love to resort to "I know you are but what am >> I" schoolyard lames, Tholen. > >Classic hallucination on your part, Deco. Classic illogic on your part, Tholen. -- "Substantiation that you regard yourself as a God to be worhsipped [sic] should be your concern, Deco." -- David Tholen |
|
06-13-2008, 03:14 PM
| |||
| |||
| Re: I like wabbits! :nelohT >Still suffering from attribution problems, Deco? Classic >inconsistency, given your use of the ":nelohT" attribution above, >Deco. Classic erroneous presupposition. Interesting that you regard >your "this" as pathetic, Deco. Another unsubstantiated and erroneous >claim. Classic erroneous presupposition. Another unsubstantiated and >erroneous claim. What you think is irrelevant, Deco. Classic >inconsistency, given your use of the ":nelohT" attribution above, >Deco. Another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. You mean your >boilerplate spam, Deco. It's hardly your "sig", Deco. Classic >inconsistency, given your use of the ":nelohT" attribution above, >Deco. Classic hallucination on your part, Deco. Classic >hallucination on your part, Deco. Classic inconsistency, given your >use of the ":nelohT" attribution above, Deco. Classic erroneous >presupposition. Classic hallucination on your part, Deco. Classic >inconsistency, given your use of the ":nelohT" attribution above, >Deco. Classic erroneous presupposition. Classic hallucination on >your part, Deco. Classic inconsistency, given your use of the >":nelohT" attribution above, Deco. Classic erroneous presupposition. >Classic hallucination on your part, Deco. Classic inconsistency, >given your use of the ":nelohT" attribution above, Deco. Classic >erroneous presupposition. Classic hallucination on your part, Deco. >Classic erroneous presupposition. Classic inconsistency, given your >use of the ":nelohT" attribution above, Deco. Classic hallucination >on your part, Deco. Classic inconsistency, given your use of the >":nelohT" attribution above, Deco. Classic erroneous presupposition. >I'm well aware that your inconsistency is illogical, Deco. No need >to tell me about it. Classic hallucination on your part, Deco. >Classic inconsistency, given your use of the ":nelohT" attribution >above, Deco. Classic erroneous presupposition. Classic hallucination >on your part, Deco. Classic inconsistency, given your use of the >":nelohT" attribution above, Deco. There is no need to remind me. >Classic hallucination on your part, Deco. Classic erroneous >presupposition. Classic inconsistency, given your use of the >":nelohT" attribution above, Deco. Still suffering from reading >comprehension problems, Deco? There is no such agreement in anything >that I wrote, Deco. Classic inconsistency, given your use of the >":nelohT" attribution above, Deco. Classic erroneous presupposition. >Classic inconsistency, given your use of the ":nelohT" attribution >above, Deco. Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, >Deco? There is no such agreement in anything that I wrote, Deco. >Classic inconsistency, given your use of the ":nelohT" attribution >above, Deco. Irrelevant, given that I neve claimed otherwise, Deco. >Classic inconsistency, given your use of the ":nelohT" attribution >above, Deco. Classic kookery on your part, Deco: Ouch, Tholen. 38 Classics, this really hurts. I'm going to have to leave usenet forever again. -- "Substantiation that you regard yourself as a God to be worhsipped [sic] should be your concern, Deco." -- David Tholen |
|
06-13-2008, 03:14 PM
| |||
| |||
| Re: I like wabbits! Art Deco <erfc-1024@usa.net> writes: > :nelohT Still suffering from attribution problems, Deco? >>> :nelohT >>>>> :nelohT >>>>>>> :nelohT >>>>>>>>> :nelohT >>>>>>>>>>> :nelohT >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Still Non Classic >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That depends on your definition of the word "classic", Tholen. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Non sequitur. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sequitur. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. >>>>>>>>>>>>> Non sequitur. >>>>>>>>>>>> Another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. >>>>>>>>>>> Still non classic. >>>>>>>>>> Non sequitur. >>>>>>>>> Another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. >>>>>>>> On your part, Deco. >>>>>>> Illogical. >>>>>> I'm well aware that another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim on >>>>>> your part is illogical, Deco. No need to tell me about it. >>>>> Still illogical. >>>> I'm well aware that another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim on >>>> your part is still illogical, Deco. No need to tell me about it. >>> I'm well aware that you love to resort to "I know you are but what am >>> I" schoolyard lames, Tholen. >> Classic hallucination on your part, Deco. > Classic illogic on your part, Tholen. Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim on your part, Deco. > "Substantiation that you regard yourself as a God to be worhsipped [sic] > should be your concern, Deco." > -- David Tholen Classic kookery on your part, Deco: "Out-of-context quotes in your boilerplate spam, Davie, how kooky." --Art Deco |
|
06-13-2008, 03:14 PM
| ||||
| ||||
| Re: I like wabbits! :nelohT >Art Deco <erfc-1024@usa.net> writes: > >> :nelohT > >>>> :nelohT > >>>>>> :nelohT > >>>>>>>> :nelohT > >>>>>>>>>> :nelohT > >>>>>>>>>>>> :nelohT > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Still Non Classic > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That depends on your definition of the word "classic", >Tholen. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Non sequitur. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sequitur. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Non sequitur. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. > >>>>>>>>>>>> Still non classic. > >>>>>>>>>>> Non sequitur. > >>>>>>>>>> Another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. > >>>>>>>>> On your part, Deco. > >>>>>>>> Illogical. > >>>>>>> I'm well aware that another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim on >>>>>>> your part is illogical, Deco. No need to tell me about it. > >>>>>> Still illogical. > >>>>> I'm well aware that another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim on >>>>> your part is still illogical, Deco. No need to tell me about it. > >>>> I'm well aware that you love to resort to "I know you are but what am >>>> I" schoolyard lames, Tholen. > >>> Classic hallucination on your part, Deco. > >> Classic illogic on your part, Tholen. > >Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim on your part, Deco. Classic hallucination on your part, Tholen. -- "Substantiation that you regard yourself as a God to be worhsipped [sic] should be your concern, Deco." -- David Tholen |
Linear Mode
