--- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], "geezerfreak" <geezerfreak@> > > wrote: > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > > (As a courtesy to the TBs, I removed my sarcasm that was > > > > > inserted here. For some reason, I am rapidly losing my > > > > > openmindedness) > > > > > > > > I have to say (well, no, I don't have to, but I'm > > > > gonna), your thinking on these issues seems to me > > > > much less clear and objective than it has been in > > > > discussions on other topics. (And no, it's not just > > > > because we don't agree. I'm just getting a sense of > > > > muddledness. Apparently I'm a minority of one on > > > > that point, though.) > > > > > > > Welcome to the world of Judy Stein, Ruth. She's just getting > > > started on you. Ignore her and keep posting. > > > > Ruth, ignore geezerfreak. He just made a couple of > > big bloopers and is trying to take his frustration > > and embarrassment out on me. > > I suspect that Ruth is smart enough to have > noticed that Geezerfreak has never once tried > to "win" or "score points" on this forum, and > that that's pretty much ALL that you do.
That's just insane, Barry. Of geezerfreak's posts addressed to me, more than 50 of a total of around 60 have attempted to "score points" or "win" against me. Do a search if you don't believe me, then try to figure out how you managed to miss all 50-plus of them. (Mostly "scoring points," as completely unprovoked attacks. During his sojourn here since MMY died, he's actually twice engaged me in substantive debates, the first times he's ever done that.) > > I further suspect that she'll draw the right > conclusion from having noticed that... >
