Subject: Re: On nil qua false [was: Re: On conditionals]
From: Erik Naggum <>
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 20:27:19 GMT
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Message-ID: <>

* Andreas Bogk
| Have *you* ever tried to change a law?

  Yes.  I also succeeded.  Next moronic question, please.

| All I'm saying is that if I fail to conform to Common Lisp, it is still
| Lisp.

  This is sheer idiocy.  Implying that you believe something so
  fantastically moronic is not a very smart move on your part.

> Then I will consider you a criminal in our little society, one who is
> fighting "laws he consider immoral or meaningless" simply because he has
> failed to think things through.

| Usually considering something immoral and meaningless involves thinking.

  A typical moron response.  "Fail to think things _through_" cannot be
  countered simply by arguing that something "usually involves thinking".
  In fact, you _support_ my argument that yo do not think things _through_.

| Because *you* treat me that way, and I suggest this is *your* problem.
| Seems to be hard for you to understand.

  When a criminal gets caught, it is always whoever catches him who is to
  blame for his predicament.  That you react this way supports my image of
  you as someone who has not learned to subordinate his desires to that of
  an authority.  Usually, this is due to massive immaturity or arrested
  development, but sometimes, it is a kind of arrogance that actually has
  concluded that society can go to hell.  How do you make people change
  their mind once you have given them this "impression"?  You _THINK_ and
  provide them with counter-evidence.  Of course, trying to give you any
  counter-evidence to your religious lunacy has made you even _more_
  certain that you are right.  This indicates that you retarded or have
  never actually _observed_ that you have been wrong at any time in your
  whole life.  This goes with the arrogance and maturity problems you have
  so far made a point out of underlining.

  If you do not like this "personal touch", quit accusing people of being
  religious simply because you are too stupid to argue against them.

> and you want Dylan to be a Lisp. 

| Well, it is.  It's not Common Lisp, though.

  Dylan is a Lisp the day Perl is a Lisp.  For the same reason.

| If he says Scheme is a Lisp, and that Lisp has shortcomings, he's saying
| that Scheme has shortcomings.  So there's no point.

  Sigh.  You probably even believe this.  I feel sorry for you the day when
  you figure out what marketing is made of, indeed human communication.

| What I want to captialize on is sharing experience with other Lisp people
| about the common foundations.  You can hardly blame me for that.

  I can blame you for not inviting people into your little pond to discuss
  them there, and that is what I do.  Go back to comp.lang.dylan and talk
  about your favorite Dylan things there.  Invite Lisp people to your forum.
  Obviously, you know that this will fail to have any desired impact, and
  still you have not figured out why Scheme people talk negatively about
  "Lisp" and positively about "Scheme".  Pretty amazing, really.

| I don't believe that *a* right answer is *the* right answer.  It's
| hard to find out how you read that from my above comment.

  Really?  A moron who finds evidence of religion at the drop of a hat has
  problems figuring out how his own arguments look to others.  Dude, how
  have you managed to stay alive so long?

| It's just that I don't think that *a* wrong answer is *the* wrong answer,
| for precisely the same reason.  That's what I have written above, and it
| would suit you well to address this argument, instead of handwaving.

  If _a_ wrong answer was _the_ wrong answer, it would mean that every
  _other_ answer would be right.  Such is the implication of "_the_ right
  answer", but I am not surprised that you do not get this.  I think I have
  had enough of your idiocy, now.  You clearly cannot think under pressure,
  much less logically, so I asusme that your brain actually only functions
  when your ego is massaged sufficiently, so it can only be used when you
  feel safe and secure.  That is pretty useless -- thinking hard should be
  most available because it is most _useful_ when you are under pressure.
  You are not even smart enough to hold back from posting until you can
  start to think clearly.

  Dylan seems to breed idiots faster than it breeds applications.

  The past is not more important than the future, despite what your culture
  has taught you.  Your future observations, conclusions, and beliefs are
  more important to you than those in your past ever will be.  The world is
  changing so fast the balance between the past and the future has shifted.