Skip to main content
news

Re: Paintshop and Corel

Sandman
Google Google
SubjectRe: Paintshop and Corel
FromSandman
Date11/27/2013 09:02 (11/27/2013 09:02)
Message-ID<slrnl9b9qr.1rf.mr@irc.sandman.net>
Client
Newsgroupsrec.photo.digital
FollowsTony Cooper
In article <e1ha9957mr942k00j869fvqasagt07tlkg@4ax.com>, Tony Cooper wrote:

Sandman
Look - I'm perfectly fine with you calling someone's backup method as a "protocol", you got into this mess because you choose to be all condescending towards someone whose only crime was to say that he had never heard that particular term being used. You are free to use it for whatever you want! You can do your usenet-posting protocol, or your objective-mounting protocol or whatever!

Your problem is that you will find EVERY chance you get to argue about ANYTHING for as long as possible.

See what I mean? Ad hominem's is all you've got.

Contrary to you, I suppose? Haha :)

I really can't be held responsible for how things "seem" to you, Tony.

Mr Obvious strikes yet again. :)

Tony Cooper
It is not unnoticed that in this post, as in most of yours, you never actually present a different definition of any term I've used,

This is *obviously* not the case for "most of my" posts, since I always supply substantiations for when your "definition" of a word differ from the real world, after first having made you aware of the fact that you don't seem to understand the word. This is true for the word "protocol", "standard" and now "requirements".

a different explanation of anything I've explained, or any reason that anything I've said is wrong.

So... you can't read? I've provided ample material for that.

Most of your post's content is devoted to juvenile "Haha"s, tangle tangle tangle, whining about ad hominems [sic], and other nonsubstantial nonsense. You've contributed nothing of value and no information. Just wind.

Now THAT's an ironic remark coming from Tony the Antagonizer! If you hadn't started this circus with your extremely juvenlie and antagonizing condescending post towards nospam, you wouldn't be in this position. I really can't take you seriously in any capacity if you really imagine that you've contributed *anything* of value to this thread. I have at least provided definitions, explanations, corrections and clarifications for every point I've made.

-- Sandman[.net]