On Tue, 17 Dec 2002, matt benson wrote: > hmm...should have expected some sort of snide conceptual remark to come > floating back.
Bleat. Babycheeks. We 'sent' you no 'conceptual remarks'. We don't 'concept'. Your "expectations" are simply a brain knee-jerk + blindness on your part. How does it go: the eye only sees what the brain is prepared to see :) > and who cares if i comment from the sidelines Ah NICE!! Abrogation of responsibility + passive-aggressive voyerism. > instead of > getting overly emotionally involved and defensive. Tzzt. babycheeks. You weren't requested to get 'emotionally involved and defensive". rather we'd rather you didn't. ACTION dearest doesn't imply any of the above, so you may stop posturing as if the above was expected of you. :) > and this IS entertaining, No babycheeks. It ISn"t entertaining. You choose to REACT like a spectacle victim and be 'entertained'. > though in no way relating to the likes of > mind-numbing television and laugh tracks. ouch...i feel my brain working > here. hurts doesn't it? Your brain is not working in the least. > isn't that authoritative of you to define what IS delusional and what isn't. yes IT IS AUTHORITATIVE. And we are capable of this authority. In fact it is as conscious authority on such matters that wechoose to act. And in fact such do exist. > thanks for your help. Nobody offered you any help babycheeks. Help yourself, and quit actinga s if you're solicited when you haven't been.
