Re: Fully sick

On Mon, 3 Apr 2006 11:10:46 +0200, "Father Ignatius"
<FatherIgnatius@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

In news:44308BB8.E9BE1643@xxxxxxxxx,
Reinhold (Rey) Aman <aman@xxxxxxxxx> typed:
Patricia Pasterham wrote:

Peter Moylan wrote:

But you can read.

Shut the *** up.

Look, Nat and Donna.

~~~ Rey ~~~
Shaking his head

Will someone please explain to me, as to someone who does not get it, why
it's okay to flame, belittle and deride Mrs. Pasterham (optionally
obscenely), but it's not okay for her to respond? I think this might be a
valuable steeping-stone along the path to getting her to discuss English
usage, as broadly defined.

Where did Peter flame her? He made some disapproving observations,
warm hints, perhaps, but *flames*? The response is out of proportion
(and tone).

Sure, I take the point that her performance to date in this area has been
less than stellar (I'm sure you can re-cast this more robustly), but I'm
guessing she'd do better if she wasn't being beaten around the head and
shoulders the whole time.

I suspect she is making some point about emoticons and their absence,
but I can't see why she thinks the game worth the candle.

Her troll index is on the ascendant.

--
Richard Bollard
Canberra Australia

To email, I'm at AMT not spAMT.
.