Google| Subject | Re: iPad power supply unit (was: Re: Adobe's Low hanging) |
| From | Sandman |
| Date | 08/04/2014 13:32 (08/04/2014 13:32) |
| Message-ID | <slrnltus7i.6rt.mr@irc.sandman.net> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
| Follows | Eric Stevens |
| Followups | Eric Stevens (13h & 49m) > Sandman |
In article <43nut9hfosg0clour3sfjlbvf02kmkuldo@4ax.com>, Eric Stevens wrote:
So, someone else changed the terminology but didn't change the subject, but when I responded to him on base of the changed terminology, I was the one who changed the subject?Eric StevensSandmanSandmanEric Stevens
Sigh, you really can't be this stupid, Eric. No one can. So if I get this right - another poster starts talking about something and if I respond to him and talk about the same thing he is talking about - then *I* have changed the subject?
You have changed the subject you are talking about.
Make up your mind, did I change the subject or the terminology?
I haven't consulted my lawyer but I think I can safely say that you adopted someone else's terminology and used that to change the subject.
You're not seriously posting this nonsense with a straight face, are you?
Again - admit to your error - *I* didn't change terminology, and *I* didn't change the subject, contrary to your claims. Someone else did and for whatever reason you want to "blame" me for it.
If you would grow up and act like an adult, you'd see that you were wrong and either admit to your error or just silently walk away from the thread and try to forget it. Coming back for more time after time makes you a moron.
It's the other way around - *YOU* are the one that made an explicit claim about me not understanding semantics, the burden of proof lies oh so heavily on your frail shoulders, Eric. I have nothing to prove since I have made no claims one way or the other.Eric StevensSandmanTry http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SemanticsSandman
First sentence: "Semantics ([...]) is the study of meaning""Linguistic semantics is the study of meaning that is used for understanding human expression through language"I couldn't find anything that said that "it's not" about word meanings. You know, like you explicitly claimed it is.Eric Stevens
Unfortunately the authors of the Wikipedia article didn't know you were coming.
Yes, so you proved yourself wrong along with all the proof I submitted as well. Does that make you doubly wrong?
Prove that you know what is meant by semantics by avoiding the use of the term to quibble about word meanings.
For the record, and as has been shown, I know far more about the meaning of semantics than you do.
-- Sandman[.net]
07/10/2014-
