On Fri, 2003-01-17 at 16:05, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Fri, 2003-01-17 at 19:51, Lyvim Xaphir wrote:
> > One point I'd like to make is that you use the word irrevelant quite > > excessively, mostly when you don't want to mentally encompass the other > > person's point of view; the other person is always irrevelant, yet your > > pov is not. In this case, once again, you blatantly obfuscate the idea > > that John was putting across, which is that this is an apples to oranges > > comparison; thus useless for sane debate in the arena in which you began > > discussion. You comparison is perhaps useful in a one minded mentally > > rabid debate, which seems to be where it's at right now. > > > > > > >>>>snip rest of blah<<<<<< > > > > --LX > > Nope, I say something's irrelevant when it's irrelevant to what I'm > saying. I disagree. > If you frame something as a reply to something I say, but in > fact what you're saying isn't relevant to the point I made, I'm going to > call you on it, and that's what I did. His point is valid in its way, > and if he'd made it in a separate post I wouldn't have replied to it the > way I did here; but if he's going to say it as if it refuted what I > said, then I'm sorry, but he's wrong. It doesn't. Yeah, it does. And you are wrong, John is right, and we are going to have to agree to disagree. > -- > adamw > --LX -- ��������������������������������������������������� Kernel 2.4.18-6mdk Mandrake Linux 8.2 Enlightenment 0.16.5-11mdk Evolution 1.0.2-5mdk Registered Linux User #268899 http://counter.li.org/ ���������������������������������������������������
