Skip to main content
news

Re: Calumet files Chapter 7

Sandman
Google Google
SubjectRe: Calumet files Chapter 7
FromSandman
Date04/05/2014 11:48 (04/05/2014 11:48)
Message-ID<slrnljvkft.9me.mr@irc.sandman.net>
Client
Newsgroupsrec.photo.digital
FollowsEric Stevens
In article <2lsuj9d20ddv2cb3p32dlikhketinh0p87@4ax.com>, Eric Stevens wrote:

PeterN
Only the times when you use an inappropriate word.

Sandman
You are free to point to any such time, Peter. Be my guest. I am happy to be corrected when I make mistakes. Be sure to point to the post of my inappropiate usage and substantiation for how and why it was inappropriate.

Eric Stevens
Isn't that what the present argument is about?

Sandman
No, not that I'm aware of. Tony incorrectly thought I had used the word "onslaught" inappropriately, but failed to show how, and I have since substantiated that I was using it correctly - which is when he quietly left the thread to lick his wounds.

Eric Stevens
You may have convinced yourself but you didn't convince me.

Well, whether or not I convince anyone isn't all that relevant. I've substantiated my position fully and completely, while no opposing position has submitted any substantiation.

Here is my substantiation, for reference:

http://usenet.sandman.net/reader/index/read?id=147796

And this was related to the word "onslaught" in the meaning of "a large quantity of people or things that is difficult to cope with"

There is no doubt that Tony, at the time and now, had some severe difficulties to cope with the sheer amount of substantiation I provided for my position (as outlined in the above link). Thus - I have provided support for my position that the word "onslaught" was used correctly. As of yet, no substantiations have been provided that contradict this.

Hope that helps, Eric.

-- Sandman[.net]