You've already told her to shut up several times, so that's repetitive and boring as well.
On Jan 4, 2012, at 13:48, "Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint" <[email protected]> wrote: > Mary Yugo stated/asked, > “Same response to the same repetition of absolute nonsense about Rossi and > Defkalion. You always seem to object to my response but not to the inanity > that spawned it. Why do you think that is?” > > That’s easy… and I’ve explained it to you before. > I have stated my reservations (more than once) about the whole affair 6 > months ago; and because I try to abide by the guidelines of this forum, I > don’t want to repeat what I have already stated. What part of that don’t you > understand? > -Mark > > From: Mary Yugo [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2012 10:36 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:"A competent observer's assessment of > Defkalion" - Revisited > > > > 2012/1/4 Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint <[email protected]> > Mary Yugo stated, for the millionth time, > “A much better theory is that, as Rossi says, they have nothing to show.” > > Same old tired repetition, despite numerous requests that you avoid it. You > just never learn… > Is there really a brain behind the name or is it just a very poor > implementation of Artificial Intelligence responding to vortex posts? If AI, > then the programmer forgot to #include <learn.h> > -Mark > > Same response to the same repetition of absolute nonsense about Rossi and > Defkalion. You always seem to object to my response but not to the inanity > that spawned it. Why do you think that is? >
