Skip to main content
news

Re: Paintshop and Corel

Eric Stevens
Google Google
SubjectRe: Paintshop and Corel
FromEric Stevens
Date11/29/2013 22:12 (11/30/2013 10:12)
Message-ID<de0i99dm5918ia24po2np0a723goff7pde@4ax.com>
Client
Newsgroupsrec.photo.digital
FollowsSandman
On 29 Nov 2013 09:34:39 GMT, Sandman <mr@sandman.net>wrote:

Sandman
In article <aujg999qpfok1bn0ed3csogntk6fvopnck@4ax.com>, Eric Stevens wrote:

Sure, I sometimes post something antagonizing, and sometimes I refer to an argument from the past, but on the whole - I do not match much of these criterias like you guys do.

Eric Stevens
Are you trying to claim that you are not guilty of any of these?

Sandman
Eric, can't you read? I've snipped everything but the part of my post that contained the answer to your question. You're welcome.

You have admitted you are sometimes guilty of posting something antagonizing and or referring to arguments from the past. Does this mean that you also claim you are not guilty of any of the rest of your list:

02. Creative snipping 03. Willfull misinterpretation 04. Diversion 05. Having an agenda (here's you!) 06. Lying (Eric and Tony fit nicely here) 07. Role Reversal 08. Insults (also you) 09. Forging posts and material 10. "one for all" reasoning 11. Unsubstantiated "refutations" (Eric are good at these) 12. Thread hijacking 13. Projection (like you do above) 14. Unsubstantiated accusations (Eric mostly) 15. Antagonizing threads (like Tony has done) 16. Quote-scavanging 17. Ignoring evidence (Tony and Eric are particularly good at this) 18. Obfuscation --

Regards,

Eric Stevens