Re: "cop-out" [was: Re: Slinky]

On Thu, 09 Mar 2006 21:55:25 +0100, Ross Howard
<gguiri@xxxxxxxxx> said:

On Thu, 09 Mar 2006 20:12:31 GMT, Bob Cunningham
<exw6sxq@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrought:

On Thu, 09 Mar 2006 19:59:56 GMT, Bob Cunningham
<exw6sxq@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> said:

On Thu, 09 Mar 2006 16:43:40 +0100, Ross Howard
<gguiri@xxxxxxxxx> said:

[...]

Oy! You need more data, preferably numerical, to make a remark like
that.

That's the sort of illogical [*]copout[*] I'd expect from Cooper.
Maybe you and he are soul mates.

TC used to weasel but he stopped. Now he just stoats occasionally.

Make that "cop-out" to conform with the spelling shown
in both British and American dictionaries. (Noun "sop-out",
verb "cop out".)

But after reading the definitions, I'm not sure "cop-out" is
exactly the word I want. What should we call it when
someone makes a joke to change the subject and divert
attention from his or her error instead of facing up to it?
Does anyone besides me think of that as a cop-out?

I withdrew the only error (claiming that the "bulk of your output"
included references or responses to the people you claimed you wanted
to ignore). Did you miss that?

Of course not. In fact I've commented on it, saying that
while your remark didn't make sense, your intent was clear.
I'm holding you to that intent.

The fact that nine -- now ten -- threads started by you since the
first of February name your nemeses in either the header or first two
words remains that: a fact, not an error.

But your original intent was to question my dream of having
a Perl script to ignore all postings containing certain
pestilential posters. The intent of your criticism was
based on the fact that in ignoring those postings, I would
ignore most of the threads I was participating in. That
was, of course, both untrue and none of your business, and
it was extremely rude of you to comment as you did. Were
you insufferably rude before you left England, or is that a
trait you've picked up in your new home?

Are you keeping track of the number of rude postings you've
posted in recent days? I've lost count.

You took the initiative of criticizing me and I responded.
I'm going to let it go at that. I'll probably ignore any
continued waffling you do, so don't expect any more
responses from me. From now on, so far as I'm concerned,
you don't exist.

To borrow a phrase you once rudely addressed to me, "Bugger
off". Or, if you prefer, drop dead. Or maybe go to hell.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: advice for running parallels or vmware on mac pro
    ... such responses and try to learn from that. ... I don't think you have any such intent. ... that the earth was flat. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.system)
  • Re: Availablity of PDP-11 PICK?
    ... That was a very pleasant and considerate post. ... someone is bound to connect me to the postings concerning Rachel's ... did not directly accuse Rachel of anything, unlike the *polite* posting I am ... It is my intent here *too*, although I do have to admit to a wry ...
    (comp.databases.pick)
  • Re: What the heck is "INTERNET LAW"? ( Rant on)
    ... >>> lawyer could prove intent to cause harm by it I'm sure. ... >> As for the responses I made, I think they are a non-issue. ... All the other trolls are taken already. ...
    (alt.med.fibromyalgia)
  • Re: What the heck is "INTERNET LAW"? ( Rant on)
    ... >> lawyer could prove intent to cause harm by it I'm sure. ... > As for the responses I made, I think they are a non-issue. ... BTW, what I meant was, feed the troll, own the troll. ...
    (alt.med.fibromyalgia)
  • Re: a free improvisation im putting out there for open for discussion and critiquing
    ... I'm surprised you didn't state your intent directly, ... even in the 3rd person to the idle passer-by, rather than being rude. ... anyway, i don't see a mutual respect, but i just offered to respond if ... responding before to heart, ...
    (rec.music.makers.guitar.jazz)