Dominik L.. Borkowski wrote:
it.
>
> First you try to insult me again and then you say "let's not fight"? How
> about no?

Oh, we're so, uh, um, so Hollywood.... except you left out "like." If you
want to be California Cool you can't say 'no' without 'like' in front of it.
And you might consider ending with 'dude.' Dom, if you want to walk the walk
you gotta talk the talk :-)

>My social skills are just fine, even if I happen to act like a
> jerk to you right now.

> That doesn't change my social skills, in fact, I'm
> greatly exercising them.

You say you DID graduate from college somewhere? I'm not sure logic was a
class you paid much attention in.


> Then again, I'm sure you'll again whine about your personal life
> and list your accomplishments, like you've done in the past?
>

And you have WHAT accomplishments? I'm listening. I'm not hearing you. Hello?


> Face it. You still need to learn how to separate your personal life from the
> purely technical conversations on the net.

Who died and left YOU in charge here? What? Somewhere in the night the group
got renamed to alt.os.linux.borkowski? Where do YOU come off telling me or
anyone what they need to learn and what they can talk about? What advanced
degree in pedagogy do you hold?


> I won't go around whine
> about what happened to my spouse

Do you have a spouse? How about just a date? Recently?

>and how much more of a man it makes me,

Son, you don't have the first idea of what a 'man' really is.

You know Dom, I gave you a nice, graceful way out. I said in effect 'lets not
go any further.' And if you had half a brain you would have either not
answered or just posted "Yeah, lets agree to disagree and leave it at that."
It's really not that hard to reach accommodation with those whom you disagree
with or don't like. You should have followed the example of G.M. He and I
agree to disagree.... on everything. And it works fine. But no... you have
something to prove... and I don't know if it's to me, to 'the group' or just
to yourself.

Let it go, Dom.

Let this thread die the death it deserves.

ANC

Al C. wrote:

> Oh, we're so, uh, um, so Hollywood.... except you left out "lgracefully
you
> want to be California Cool you can't say 'no' without 'like' in front of
> it. And you might consider ending with 'dude.' Dom, if you want to walk
> the walk you gotta talk the talk :-)

I'll let you do the 'cool' talk. Seems that you have some kind of experience
with it. Of course, there could be such simple explanation, that English is
not my native language, and I do make mistakes on occasion.

> You say you DID graduate from college somewhere? I'm not sure logic was a
> class you paid much attention in.

Yes, in fact I did graduate from college, somewhere.

> And you have WHAT accomplishments? I'm listening. I'm not hearing you.
> Hello?

That would mean I'd have to contradict what I've been telling you. Thanks,
but no thanks.

> Who died and left YOU in charge here? What? Somewhere in the night the
> group got renamed to alt.os.linux.borkowski? Where do YOU come off telling
> me or anyone what they need to learn and what they can talk about? What
> advanced degree in pedagogy do you hold?

Ohh, aren't you getting hot and steamy. Let's see how much more flame can we
add.

> Do you have a spouse? How about just a date? Recently?

Now that's a good one. She's doing just fine, thanks for asking. However,
unlike you, I don't feel the urge to share my personal life with the rest
of the world. Ohh, you still haven't began to comprehend that concept.

> You know Dom, I gave you a nice, graceful way out. I said in effect 'lets
> not go any further.' And if you had half a brain you would have either not
> answered or just posted "Yeah, lets agree to disagree and leave it at
> that." It's really not that hard to reach accommodation with those whom
> you disagree with or don't like. You should have followed the example of
> G.M. He and I agree to disagree.... on everything. And it works fine. But
> no... you have something to prove... and I don't know if it's to me, to
> 'the group' or just to yourself.

How about reversing this silly attempt to reason things. Why don't you let
it gracefully go? If you had half a brain left, why would you continue
this?

> Let it go, Dom.

How about this: you let it go. Are you able to do it? C'mon, show me the
bigger man here. You do want to prove your superiority here, aren't you?
Let's see you putting your money where your mouth is.

Al C. wrote:

>You know Dom, I gave you a nice, graceful way out. I said in effect 'lets
>not go any further.' And if you had half a brain you would have either not
>answered or just posted "Yeah, lets agree to disagree and leave it at
>that." It's really not that hard to reach accommodation with those whom
>you disagree with or don't like. You should have followed the example of
>G.M. He and I agree to disagree.... on everything. And it works fine.

Normally I wouldn't comment, but since you invoked me as an example,
I will reply once and then go back to ignoring you. Here is my reply:

It is my considered opinion that your continued aggressive behavior is
a detriment to this newsgroup. Another detriment to this newsgroup are
all of those keep poking at you with sticks just so they can watch you
snarl. The fact that I want no part of your ongoing fight does *not*
mean that I approve of it. The fact that I disapprove of it does *not*
mean that I disapprove of one side more than the other.

"Agreeing to disagree and leaving it at that" does *not* include using
me as ammunition when flaming others. Please don't do that.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

_.-In alt.os.linux.slackware, Dominik L.. Borkowski wrote the following -._
> it's alt.os.linux.slackware not alt.my.personal.life.story

> I tend not to confuse technical news groups for shrink sessions.

Two, Two <mod quotes> in one post.

- --
.-')) http://asciipr0n.com/fp ('-. | It's a damn poor mind that
' ..- .:" ) ( ":. -.. ' | can only think of one way to
((,,_;'.;' UIN=66618055 ';. ';_,,)) | spell a word.
((_.YIM=Faux_Pseudo :._)) | - Andrew Jackson
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFBBb+wSJec2PH9pbURAtbvAJ4l4wBPbM5HVmM4pMC6cm zQudGC7gCbBXAI
yBOytkcBNKF6zgjuev9+mok=
=5Bus
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

_.-In alt.os.linux.slackware, Dominik L.. Borkowski wrote the following -._
>> Dominik L.. Borkowski wrote:
> kudos to you for being able to infer so much
> from a simple e-mail address.

You ever thought about becomeing a Hated Regular and, maybe even one
day, a BOZO? You have a knack for pissing ABC off and providing sound
advice. You have Slack.

- --
.-')) http://asciipr0n.com/fp ('-. | It's a damn poor mind that
' ..- .:" ) ( ":. -.. ' | can only think of one way to
((,,_;'.;' UIN=66618055 ';. ';_,,)) | spell a word.
((_.YIM=Faux_Pseudo :._)) | - Andrew Jackson
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFBBcDMSJec2PH9pbURAveZAJ4t2B1/B9ekCnZ3q8nRH3BjJ4NdSQCfUCBo
opt4IjLZgFIxDT5+F+iKOWE=
=NrCs
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----