Re: Lets get physical
- From: "Cimode" <cimode@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 17 Jun 2006 05:28:49 -0700
Keith H Duggar wrote:
Cimode wrote:Yes that's says a lot about your apitude to bring relevant
It's Cimode ...
Trust me, it's /Commode/.
Of course the non responsiveness just proves my point..
It is not that you DON'T answer...It's just that you CAN'T
and that pisses you off to the point that you have nothing
left but insults and buzz expression to defend your full
scale ignorance !!! I rest my case...
LMAO. I don't answer what? I haven't participated in the
technical part of this thread for 12 days.
subjects...You'd rather insult people than anything else...
I posted one
question at that time and couldn't make any sense out ofOf course, you are so mentally impaired that you CAN'T make sense of
your answer nor could I make sense of your other postings.
simple sentences...Duhh
Thus, either I don't have the knowledge needed to understand(notice I have no trouble admitting this possibility,
you
What a hyppocrisy!!!
Of course you don't have it..It is obvious and typical from somebody
who judges on belief rather than reasonning...
If you had any understanding of what RM is there would be no argument
between use...But instead of admitting you directly shoot at people on
basis of prepackaged disqualiying ideas...
You have no clue about RM and you thrust SQL garbage to make some sense
out of it...
and it doesn't come close to "pissing me off" and it seemsWRONG some people made sense right away about the right issues in
even the experts are having trouble communicating with you),
threads and I had interesting exchanges with them...
What *Experts* ?
The fact you call people like BB or JM Davitt *Experts* people who
confuse a relvar and a relvar projection...People who state blanfully
(JM Davitt) that a it is not possible to make an arhythmetic operation
between two relvalues unless the relation are of same type are nothing
but ignorants of RM concepts...People like BB who redefine the meaning
of what an mathematical Axiom is claiming it is a boolean value are not
experts...Experts do not run away or insult people when challenged
whith sound proof and reasonning...
Maybe Experts of Bulshiteness
or you are a crank. Either way, I saw no need to participateSo you team up..If you had half a brain you would put everything in
further in the /technical/ conversion. I did see a need to
help expose a possible crank.
doubt read post and make up your own mind about tehcnical posts I
made...Instead, you jump right away to scarewitch hunting....And you
consider yourself an Expert? Right? LOL...
Again don't you know how to use anything else than prepackaged words to
describe situations...Is your vocabulary so limited that you need
people to think for you...?
I am responding to you...
Face it. You gave a knee-jerk response to a post and had no
idea who you were responding to.
You thought you were
responding to JMD or similar. And you can't even admit thatSo I would admit a mistake just to make you feel more secure about your
minor mistake (a crank attribute by the way).
feeble mind...What and idiot...
-- Keith --
.
- References:
- Re: Possible bridges between OO programming proponents and relational model
- From: Alfredo Novoa
- Re: Possible bridges between OO programming proponents and relational model
- From: Cimode
- Re: Possible bridges between OO programming proponents and relational model
- From: Alfredo Novoa
- Re: Possible bridges between OO programming proponents and relational model
- From: Bob Badour
- Re: Possible bridges between OO programming proponents and relational model
- From: Cimode
- Re: Possible bridges between OO programming proponents and relational model
- From: paul c
- Re: Possible bridges between OO programming proponents and relational model
- From: Cimode
- Re: Possible bridges between OO programming proponents and relational model
- From: paul c
- Lets get physical
- From: paul c
- Re: Lets get physical
- From: Cimode
- Re: Lets get physical
- From: J M Davitt
- Re: Lets get physical
- From: Cimode
- Re: Lets get physical
- From: Keith H Duggar
- Re: Lets get physical
- From: Cimode
- Re: Lets get physical
- From: Keith H Duggar
- Re: Lets get physical
- From: Cimode
- Re: Lets get physical
- From: Keith H Duggar
- Re: Possible bridges between OO programming proponents and relational model
- Prev by Date: Re: Little question for RDM theoristes
- Next by Date: Re: To Bob Badour, sorry
- Previous by thread: Re: Lets get physical
- Next by thread: Re: Lets get physical
- Index(es):