On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 11:56, Nick Rout wrote: > On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 11:52:35 +1200 > > Christopher Sawtell wrote: > > On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 10:58, Jim Cheetham wrote: > > > Bafflegab > > > > Maybe, maybe not. > > > > But how else would you politely tell someone gently that it is time that > > they read the book and expressed themselves clearly without hurting or > > insulting them by decending to using profane acronyms? > > I didn't take the reference to bafflegab as being pointed at you Chris ! Oh, I think it was, but, knowing the author, I realise that it was good natured humourous ribbing. I can take that with no problems whatsoever.
> (although if the cap fits...) It doesn't because I know full well that what I said could in no way be described as:- "Incomprehensible or pretentious language" or, more especially "multiloquence characterized by consummate interfusion of circumlocution or periphrasis, inscrutability, and other familiar manifestations of abstruse expatiation commonly utilized for promulgations implementing Procrustean determinations by governmental bodies." Lovely, isn't it? > > Btw, You might care to refer to RFC 2229 and install an interface. > > There are many available. I use kdict. otoh, I'm somewhat surprised that nobody has remarked on the acerbity of the above sentences. -- C. S.
