Google| Subject | Re: Calumet files Chapter 7 |
| From | Tony Cooper |
| Date | 03/30/2014 23:18 (03/30/2014 17:18) |
| Message-ID | <ol1hj9huenui1som31gcdodsgiqd4er6cr@4ax.com> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
| Follows | Sandman |
| Followups | Sandman (8h & 17m) |
On 30 Mar 2014 07:52:36 GMT, Sandman <mr@sandman.net>wrote:
I'll make one more attempt to explain this to you, and then I'm through.Tony CooperSandman
He uses a Catch 22 form of logic in this area. For example, he maintains that to substantiate a claim that someone ignored a valid point in a post, you must cite something in which that person declared they were omitting reference to that point.
Indeed. You on the other hand, use illogic, such as:
Tony Cooper 03/25/2014 08:09:46 PM <sjj3j9tcphc4s5ha6dlibj8h9cv2bgtcl6@4ax.com>
"If it isn't stated, it's ignored."Tony CooperSandman
In other words, you must show where the person acknowledged the point to show that the person ignored the point.
Incorrect. Good example of your rabid illogic though.Tony CooperSandman
We are no better off than Yossarian in following this kind of logic.
You wouldn't know logic if it ran you over. That's why you *REPEATEDLY* snipped out my explanations and logical reasoning regarding this topic that didn't fit your trolling agenda.
If a subject is addressed, and an aspect of that subject is not included, that aspect can be said to be "ignored". It doesn't make any difference at all if the aspect was not covered by intent, by accident, by lack of knowledge of that aspect, or for any other reason.
You seem to be under the impression that there must be a deliberate act if something is ignored. That's not the case. The use of "ignored", in this context, simply means omitted, not there, not covered.
All of those words or phrases *can*, but do not necessarily, require a deliberate action. Something can be omitted or left out deliberately or omitted by accident.
Your "logical reasons" do not apply to how the word is actually used and accepted by all native speakers of English. Your conclusion is completely contrary to established usage.
nospam ignored an aspect of online vs brick-and-mortar transactions. Whether it was ignored deliberately, because he didn't consider it, because he wasn't aware of it, or for any other reason, the aspect was ignored in his post.
The above needs no substantiation. It's a way the word is used by those who understand how the word is used. It makes no mind that you don't understand it. No amount of argumentative nonsense from you will change the fact that it is used, and used correctly, this way.
-- Tony Cooper - Orlando FL
03/13/2014-
-
