AUS TV 11 RE MELBOURNE HACKING DOCUMENTARY
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 13:31:12 +1000

From: Dave Horsfall (daveh@no-spam)
Subject: Re: Melbourne hacking documentary

On Tue, 24 Jun 2003, Fish! wrote:

> > "For whom it was intended." You appear to suffer from an inability > > to communicate your intentions to others; I'm sure there's a word > > for that condition...
>
> Hahaha, Grammer boy leaps to the rescue. Boldly correcting (or should > that be correcting boldly, don't want to splt an infinitive, you'd shoot > your load with rage)

The word for which you were groping is "grammar". Furthermore, it's not capitalised. The word "splt" is not in any language with which I'm familiar. And sentences generally end in one of these -->.

> You totally, semi-colon-using, tosser.

I use semi-colons; what a mortal sin!

> > > So is comprehension. You know like when people refer to something > > > someone ELSE said, and you don't bother replying that you think it's > > > applicable to you.
> >
> > Could you please express that in English? I think a clause is missing > > at the end.
>
> What, again? No, now you're being lazy. Stop being such a hypocrite.

No; what you wrote is not English. It looks like English, inasmuch parts of it can be parsed in a manner that results in some semantic meaning, but English it is not.

> > > Err no it's not, and to keep implying that it is is just bizarre. HAD > >
> > My ghod; 30 years of Usenet history just got flushed away by some > > newbie...
>
> Fuck you're a Drama Queen. "30 years of history flushed away" , because > of the dropping of a capital? You are a scary fellow, you're dressed up > in your Mothers skin talking to a mirror right now I bet.

More poor grammar... And no, the "30 years of history flushed away"
referred to your doubting the similarity between Usenet posts and face-to-face conversation; do try and keep up.

> You're very wrong about the newbie bit though, but this is getting fun.

Indeed; it's not often one sees someone as far removed from reality as you appear to be. And unless you were posting to Usenet since before, oh, say 1980, then you're a newbie.

[ Rest of post, consisting of previous post, deleted ]

You don't snip irrelevant material either, but at least you don't top-post, so I suppose there's some hope for you. Now, if we can just work on your spelling, grammar, comprehension, and articulation...

-- Dave

From: Fish! (Fish!@no-spam)
Subject: Re: Melbourne hacking documentary
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 14:00:37 +1000

In article <20030625131159.L36623@no-spam>, daveh@no-spam says...
> On Tue, 24 Jun 2003, Fish! wrote:
> > > > "For whom it was intended." You appear to suffer from an inability > > > to communicate your intentions to others; I'm sure there's a word > > > for that condition...
> >
> > Hahaha, Grammer boy leaps to the rescue. Boldly correcting (or should > > that be correcting boldly, don't want to splt an infinitive, you'd shoot > > your load with rage)
> > The word for which you were groping is "grammar". Furthermore, it's not > capitalised. The word "splt" is not in any language with which I'm > familiar. And sentences generally end in one of these -->.
>
This is great, it's like being berated by the worlds most pedantic poster. I see you have a need to correct my posts, please keep it up, it's entertaining me no end that you're bothering.

> > You totally, semi-colon-using, tosser.
> > I use semi-colons; what a mortal sin!

Hardly a mortal sin, just another reason to label you a tosser, wasn't that clear enough the first time I wrote it?

> > > > > So is comprehension. You know like when people refer to something > > > > someone ELSE said, and you don't bother replying that you think it's > > > > applicable to you.
> > >
> > > Could you please express that in English? I think a clause is missing > > > at the end.
> >
> > What, again? No, now you're being lazy. Stop being such a hypocrite.
> > No; what you wrote is not English. It looks like English, inasmuch parts > of it can be parsed in a manner that results in some semantic meaning, but > English it is not.

Blah blah blah. You are soooo full of shit.

> > > > > Err no it's not, and to keep implying that it is is just bizarre. HAD > > >
> > > My ghod; 30 years of Usenet history just got flushed away by some > > > newbie...
> >
> > Fuck you're a Drama Queen. "30 years of history flushed away" , because > > of the dropping of a capital? You are a scary fellow, you're dressed up > > in your Mothers skin talking to a mirror right now I bet.
> > More poor grammar... And no, the "30 years of history flushed away"
> referred to your doubting the similarity between Usenet posts and > face-to-face conversation; do try and keep up.
>
So show me the RFC where usenet was ever described as face to face dickhead?
> > You're very wrong about the newbie bit though, but this is getting fun.
> > Indeed; it's not often one sees someone as far removed from reality as you > appear to be. And unless you were posting to Usenet since before, oh, say > 1980, then you're a newbie.

Hahah wanker, anyone who hasn't been posting close to the beginning of Usenet is a newbie are they, another fucking ridiculous statement.

Tell me again how I'm removed from reality.

> > [ Rest of post, consisting of previous post, deleted ]
> > You don't snip irrelevant material either, but at least you don't > top-post, so I suppose there's some hope for you. Now, if we can just > work on your spelling, grammar, comprehension, and articulation...
> > -- Dave > I'll leave the above for you to work on, you seem to really have an enormous hard on for yourself.


From: "EnjoyDialup" (EnjoyDialup@no-spam)
Subject: Re: Melbourne hacking documentary
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 14:56:56 +1000

"Fish!" <Fish!@no-spam> wrote in message news:MPG.1963c96fd3157d59989704@no-spam > In article <20030625131159.L36623@no-spam>, daveh@no-spam > says...
> > On Tue, 24 Jun 2003, Fish! wrote:
> >
> > > > "For whom it was intended." You appear to suffer from an inability > > > > to communicate your intentions to others; I'm sure there's a word > > > > for that condition...
> > >
> > > Hahaha, Grammer boy leaps to the rescue. Boldly correcting (or should > > > that be correcting boldly, don't want to splt an infinitive, you'd shoot > > > your load with rage)
> >
> > The word for which you were groping is "grammar". Furthermore, it's not > > capitalised. The word "splt" is not in any language with which I'm > > familiar. And sentences generally end in one of these -->.
> >
>
> This is great, it's like being berated by the worlds most pedantic > poster. I see you have a need to correct my posts, please keep it up,
> it's entertaining me no end that you're bothering.

you posts obviously need correcting. You dont seem to like it when the boot is ont he other foot.

-- Dyslexia makes it hard for me to spell correctly.
Spelling corrections are not welcome.
Change SPAM to "optusnet.com.au" for an e-mail reply to work

From: Fish! (Fish!@no-spam)
Subject: Re: Melbourne hacking documentary
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 15:12:34 +1000

In article <3ef92b8f$0$24424$afc38c87@no-spam>, EnjoyDialup@no-spam says...
> > "Fish!" <Fish!@no-spam> wrote in message > news:MPG.1963c96fd3157d59989704@no-spam > > In article <20030625131159.L36623@no-spam>, daveh@no-spam > > says...
> > > On Tue, 24 Jun 2003, Fish! wrote:
> > >
> > > > > "For whom it was intended." You appear to suffer from an inability > > > > > to communicate your intentions to others; I'm sure there's a word > > > > > for that condition...
> > > >
> > > > Hahaha, Grammer boy leaps to the rescue. Boldly correcting (or should > > > > that be correcting boldly, don't want to splt an infinitive, you'd > shoot > > > > your load with rage)
> > >
> > > The word for which you were groping is "grammar". Furthermore, it's not > > > capitalised. The word "splt" is not in any language with which I'm > > > familiar. And sentences generally end in one of these -->.
> > >
> >
> > This is great, it's like being berated by the worlds most pedantic > > poster. I see you have a need to correct my posts, please keep it up,
> > it's entertaining me no end that you're bothering.
> > > you posts obviously need correcting. You dont seem to like it when the boot > is ont he other foot.
> >
Naah they don't obviously need correcting, that's the point. Yours however, do.