home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
kermit.columbia.edu
/
kermit.columbia.edu.tar
/
kermit.columbia.edu
/
newsgroups
/
misc.20000114-20000217
/
000275_news@columbia.edu _Wed Feb 16 15:10:28 2000.msg
< prev
next >
Wrap
Internet Message Format
|
2000-02-16
|
3KB
Return-Path: <news@columbia.edu>
Received: from newsmaster.cc.columbia.edu (newsmaster.cc.columbia.edu [128.59.59.30])
by watsun.cc.columbia.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id PAA03279
for <kermit.misc@watsun.cc.columbia.edu>; Wed, 16 Feb 2000 15:10:28 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from news@localhost)
by newsmaster.cc.columbia.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id CAA03012
for kermit.misc@watsun.cc.columbia.edu; Wed, 9 Feb 2000 02:00:13 -0500 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: newsmaster.cc.columbia.edu: news set sender to <news> using -f
From: Steve Manning <manning@execpc.com>
Subject: Re: MS-DOS Kermit, more incapabalities
Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2000 00:53:04 -0600
Message-ID: <38a10ed1$0$187@news.execpc.com>
Organization: ExecPC Internet - Milwaukee, WI
To: kermit.misc@columbia.edu
On Tue, 08 Feb 2000 14:16:12 GMT, cangel@famvid.com wrote:
>
>On 2000-02-07 manning@execpc.com said:
>
>SM> Newsgroups: comp.protocols.kermit.misc
>
>SM> not-2-disclose@the.net wrote:
>SM> Obviously the plans being discussed in the post you quoted were
>SM> plans for the past.
>
>Kermit = The Past IMO
Well being such an avid practitioner of revisionist history, no wonder
you spend such a large amount of time here - you get to keep your skills
in top shape.
>SM> I for one plan on investing in Microsoft upon their IPO. Anyone
>SM> know when that was?
>
>Your an entrepeneur! Are you a slicer AND a dicer?!
Uh... no... too busy payin' my bills and being a dad.
>SM> What else do you plan for *but* the future??
>
>A `Gumpism'?
Can anyone find Chuck's point? It seems to have gotten itself lost
amidst all the weak attempts to deflect my criticism of Michel's post.
>SM> C'mon Michel... cut it out... you're killing us out here!!
>
>I told the Kaptain Kermit boys they could be nice, they ignored me,
>now Michel is angry.
So that excuses the howling misstatements and (deliberate?) obtuseness
of his post?
>BTW: Do we need to know your job title or does it tickle your scrotum to
>see it in print?
So to sum up here we see Charles:
- slamming kermit as being outdated (but yet somehow still of use to
Charles, or else why do we have to put up with his continued
harangues?)
- mis-labeling me as an entrepreneur
- slamming entrepreneurs
- trying to obliquely paint me as a "Forrest Gump" philosopher (I
surmise)
- excusing Michel's laughable post which attempted to replace reason
with volume as being attributable to Michel's outrage at the Columbia
folks' shabby treatment of Charles (no ego here... nope, nuh uh)
- trying to get my goat by criticizing me for ... having an automatic
signature in my news poster (not to mention attempting to elicit a
reaction by referring to my "naughty bits")
All I did was point out that Michel tried to make a distinction between
a "plan" and a "future plan" (excuse me... a "FUTURE PLAN"), which is
rather preposterous.
You have to wonder what his real reason for posting was, because what we
*don't* see is some sort of refutation of my post's point.
All foam, no beer.
Charles, your slip is showing.
Steve
nothing else (OMG Charles! It worked! You affected change!)