On Wed, 18 Jul 2001, Smitty wrote:
> > > Assumed identities are not identical.
> >
> > And what identity would you be assuming today?
> Identitiy as I used it was in the sense of equivalence or
> same, not in the sense you have, although it is a rather
> clever pun. You are being punny. :·)
... That's more cheerful. The 'misunderstanding' pun was
intentional. -- me as the jester having a kooky antic, so to
speak.
Seriously, I _do_ try to raise the care of composition, and
logical rather than emotional volume of flamefests --
While there is 'all fight - no rules' here, to avoid
re-hashing and stirring the same old pot, it just seems fair
avoid _initiating_ ad hominem's (sort of a Goodwin's Rule); to
inject levity with argument, and at the end of the thread,
stop off for a virtual beer together [to get ready for the
next round <g>].
-- Cheers,
Russ
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 20:26:45 EDT