Sandman
In article <7ts2m9lt1ar4mrmp478el85rmhkv2irjon@4ax.com>, Eric Stevens wrote:

Eric Stevens
You are a dishonest lying baboon!

I originally wrote and you deleted:

Sandman
What you have implied is that there is some official standard that Agent does not conform with. You have yet to substantiate that.

Eric Stevens
... and it is that to which you responded. Notice my use of the word 'implied'.

Sandman
"imply" is somthing *I* do, "infer" is something *YOU* do. I didn't imply any such thing. Do you know how I know? Because I made the claim.

You inferred it, and then claim I failed to substantiate something you only inferred.

That being said, there IS such a standard, and Agent is in violation with it, but that's not what I was in reference to at the time.

You said I failed to substantiate a claim I never made.

Eric Stevens
I've pointed out previously that you tend to put up a great cloud of squink with the intention that your meaning will slowly congeal and drip from it.

Sandman
You can "point out" anything that exists only in your fantasy.

Eric Stevens
You use this as part of a debating trick to enable you to deny that you never used particular words which express that meaning more concisely.

Sandman
It's the other way around. You infer meaning from me that I never said or implied, then you're claiming - incorrectly - that I've said those things or that I haven't supported them. Of course I haven't, they're your invention!

Eric Stevens
You have repeatedly described Agent as 'non-standard', 'non-compliant', 'broken' or words to that effect.

Sandman
Do not use quote marks unless you're quoting someone. "Or words to that effect" is YOUR trolling weasaling. You and Andreas are peas in a pod. You never look up facts and just go "You said X or whatever".