From ... From: Erik Naggum Subject: Re: less parentheses --> fewer parentheses Date: 2000/08/25 Message-ID: <3176209026478606@naggum.net>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 662421885 References: <8nucvh$t9t$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <8nuol5$9hmlj$1@ID-22205.news.cis.dfn.de> <3175970194156743@naggum.net> <3176016856827528@naggum.net> <3176055529700707@naggum.net> <3176121145567846@naggum.net> <3176155410550970@naggum.net> <3176202364736569@naggum.net> mail-copies-to: never Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@eunet.no X-Trace: oslo-nntp.eunet.no 967221473 21886 195.0.192.66 (25 Aug 2000 16:37:53 GMT) Organization: Naggum Software; vox: +47 8800 8879; fax: +47 8800 8601; http://naggum.no; http://naggum.net User-Agent: Gnus/5.0803 (Gnus v5.8.3) Emacs/20.7 Mime-Version: 1.0 NNTP-Posting-Date: 25 Aug 2000 16:37:53 GMT Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp * danfm@dartmouth.edu (FM) | Do you ever have any idea what you are talking about? Yes. All the time. I know that annoys some people to no end. | Like you exemplified when Barry corrected your mistake? And which "mistake" was that? He didn't understand what I wrote, but chose to portray what I did as wrong. He always does that. Barry Margolin always finds something wrong and bad in _anything_ I do, and _especially_ if it isn't there. That's just how he is. | > but it is clear that you will never learn from a source that is | > not _very_ agreeable to you. | | What is clear? You surely like to talk about things you have | no idea about. Really? How come you provide me with the evidence and then object to the conclusion? You could _do_ something to show that you learn from a source that is disagreeable to you, instead of continuing to reinforce my argument, you know. | > Instead you will defend that _you_ be right, rather than defend | > _what_ is right and adapt your own views accordingly. | | That's what exactly you're doing. Geez, don't you tire of playing the mirror game? Do you really have to prove that everything that can be said to you must bounce off? No, I don't defend that _I_ am right. I defend what I happen to think is right, right now, and this changes as I learn more, which I do all the time. This means I continue to be more right than wrong, which annoys people who are more wrong than right, and won't change their mind to fix that dire predicament. If I have reason to change my mind, that's OK, and I will defend something that someone else said was right before I came to the same conclusion. The history of this newsgroup shows that truth at several occasions. Of course you wouldn't accept it. | That's something I've never been accused of. You've been around too many agreeable people, then. :) | Funny how you never learn when your arguments are under question. Huh? How _ever_ do you come up with your insane theories about me? | You are keenly aware of your own uselessness so I won't bother | elaborating it here. Even more pathetic mirror game playing. Sheesh, get over it. #:Erik -- If this is not what you expected, please alter your expectations.