Re: Browser survey




Travis Newbury wrote:

Guy Macon wrote:

Have you ever considered asking people what their personal
experiences were rather than telling them?

Sorry I made the assumption your online resume you advertise in your
signature (which I notice is now gone) would be accurate.

No you didn't. You made the assumption your *misinterpretation*
of my online resume and your other *unsupported false conclusions*
were accurate.

Travis Newbury wrote:

Guy Macon wrote:

Unlike you, I cannot comment on other fortune 500 corporations
where I do not have personal experience as to how much they spend
on website research.

You do know Mattel is on the list of fortune 500 companies right? I
think I need to pass you the shovel...

You appear to not be able to parse the phrase "other fortune 500
corporations." In the English language, the modifier "other" is
exclusionary. When an English speaker first mentions Mattel and
then refers to "other fortune 500 corporations", the reader who
understands the English language will conclude that the latter
phrase refers to the 499 fortune 500 corporations that are not
Mattel.

Is English a second language for you? You seem to have trouble
understanding rather simple grammatical constructions.

An alternate theory would be that you have developed a habit of
using the cheap debating trick of purposely ignoring the clear
meaning of posts that you respond to. If so, such methods will,
no doubt, allow you to convince yourself that you have "won"
whatever argument you have decided to engage in, but they also
prevent learning. I personally would much rather "lose" an
argument on Usenet if doing so increases my knowledge.

Your refusal to learn anything about the Correlation vs. Causation
Fallacy makes me suspect that you are ineducable. Considering
the real possibility that you are incapable of learning anything,
and the resulting lack of knowledge on your part that makes it
unlikely that you have anything to teach anyone else, I am
considering letting you have the last word and moving on to
more productive conversations with other newsgroup participants.



"The most hostile group was the one with high but unstable
self esteem. These people think well of themselves in general,
but their self-esteem fluctuates. They are especially prone to
react defensively to ego threats, and they are also more prone
to hostility, anger and aggression than other people.

"These findings shed considerable light on the psychology of
the bully. Hostile people do not have low self esteem; on the
contrary, they think highly of themselves, But their favorable
view of themselves is not held with total conviction, and it
goes up and down in response to daily events. The bully has a
chip on his shoulder because he thinks you might want to deflate
his favorable self image."
-Roy F. Baumeister, _Evil: Inside
Human Violence and Cruelty_ p 149


--
(.sig deleted because doing so seems to,
for some weird reason, piss Travis off.)

.