On Sat, 05 Mar 2005 00:25:05 -0700,
[email protected] may have
said:
>On Sat, 05 Mar 2005 00:13:49 -0600, Werehatrack
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>And why on earth are you resurrecting a thread that's been dead for
>>three years?
>
>Dear Werehatrack,
>
>He probably just began browsing old threads and had a
>perfectly normal flat-earth reaction to Jobst's round-earth
>theory.
It might have been a good idea for him to have read enough of it to
get a little more of a clue about the subjects before presenting
himself as a target for a game of whack-a-mole though.
(I will note that Jobst did not disappoint me with *his* response,
though I was a bit surprised that like me, he didn't check the
reference line in the headers and backtrack to discover the staleness
of the thread before posting the initial reply. Beyond that, however,
he was in fine form.)
>If anything, I'm pleased to see such a post because it
>reminds me of how I felt when I first looked at "The Bicycle
>Wheel" and wasn't bright enough to follow his first few
>pages.
As long as we don't end up with Yet Another Endless Rantfest about a
subject whose corpse was cremated and ashes scattered long ago, yes,
it's instructive to have such things brought up now and then...and for
those of us who are not presented with the opportunity to shred a
target often enough, it can provide some vicarious gratification to
see a master at work at that task.
(I will relate in passing that a different person with superficially
similar predilections was briefly the topic of conversation over
dinner recently, and it was posted that the term which most succintly
describes Harlan Ellison in social situations is "egoterrorist".
Jobst, however, has more reason for his responses, so I do not believe
the term is applicable in his case.)
--
My email address is antispammed; pull WEEDS if replying via e-mail.
Typoes are not a bug, they're a feature.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.
