Re: [CROWD] The Consistency of the Gang
- From: "Jackson Pillock" <jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 01:06:30 +0100
"gekko" <gekko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:Xns982476274CA6Ecrinkles@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
: "Jackson Pillock" <jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxx> didn't ask about the
: significance of the number 42 in the Hitchhikers' Guide to the
: Galaxy series, but DID present the following for evaluation in
: misc.writing:
:
:
: >
: > "gekko" <gekko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
: > news:slrneec44g.pan.crinkles@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
: >: Jackson Pillock <jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxx> fought off the bad guys,
: >: rescued
: > the hostage, phoned Mom on her birthday and then posted to
: > misc.writing:
: >: >
: >:
: >: I wrote:
: >: > : I would never. You don't like me, and I never say "Hmmmmmm"
: >: > : to people who dislike me.
: >: >
: >: > Okay, that's thrown me. I'm going to go out on a limb here,
: >: > and assume you're being serious. It's true that I don't
: >: > generally enjoy our interactions here. But I wouldn't say I
: >: > dislike you. I don't think I
: > know
: >: > you very well.
: >:
: >: I didn't respond to this. Wasn't sure how to. Thought about
: >: it.
: >:
: >: I have to say you've perplexed me. I don't recall being
: >: particularly mean to you, although I may have been a bit
: >: harsh in some teasing or other.
: >
: > It's no biggy. I wouldn't have mentioned it if you hadn't dropped
: > the 'you don't like me' bomb-shell. I find your style a bit
: > irritating. For instance, one time when you were calling me
: > Jaxxers. It just kind of grated on me. I didn't like the sound of
: > it. And when I said I didn't like it, you replied, 'It does not
: > please me to please,' and did it all the more. So I thought, 'Well
: > that's you hosed then, isn't it?'
:
: Hm. 'k.
:
: I can buy that.
:
: I was being a smartarse. Somehow I got the idea I could be playful
: that way with you and not have it taken seriously. It's not often I
: misread, but I _do_ misread and I'm sorry.
Like I said, no biggy. I'm sure my earnestness bugs you.
:
:
:
: >:
: >: I just know that at some point, your responses to me because
: >: peculiarly angry.
: >
: > You've missed some words out there. I can't make out what you're
: > trying to say.
:
: "because" should have been "became."
Right. I think you mean when I put my little dialogue thing up about my
work. You said, 'I'd take you more seriously if you only posted about
writing.' Again, I was like, 'Oh, what?' I was irritated, and felt like
showing off. Not really angry.
I think know what happened there, by the way. Because I titled the post
'misc.fishfingers.yum,' you took it to be a froup parody. Am I close? Really
it was a dialogue between my Critic and my Talent. Or something. Classic
usenet wire-crossing.
:
:
: >
: >:
: >: It astonished me, considering our more pleasant interactions
: >: in the past. But it didn't and doesn't especially bother me
: >: because, as you say, I don't know you very well and your regard
: >: of me isn't one of those things by which I live my life.
: >
: > Well, there it is. Perhaps these things are better left unsaid.
:
: Perhaps. I am blunt, though. So if bluntness bothers you, then,
: yes, we're probably better off avoiding one another.
We'll just roll along and do what we do.
:
: I'll adjust my responses to you accordingly, though -- not, like, you
: know. Treat you with kid gloves. I mean, I adjust how I respond to
: *everyone* according to how I perceive them.
:
: But while I don't live my life by your regard of me, I do not ever
: intend to hurt (innocent) people unduly.
We're cool.
:
: >
: >:
: >:
: >: Still. It did leave the impression you disliked me.
: >
: >
: > Call it a clash of humours.
:
: Good description.
:
: >
: >:
: >:
: >: >
: >: > And you did say, "Hmmmm." I heard you.
: >: >
: >:
: >: And ... you weren't on the list. I think you're the new Davida.
: >
: > Um...I'm Pillock. You included me in your post. Which list are you
: > talking about?
:
: The list of peeps at whom I was hmmmmm-ing ... hold on a mo' ...
:
: <.... digging up post ....>
:
: HOLY ***!
:
: I _did_ hmmmmmmm at you!!!
:
: Well, bless. I am getting _old_.
:
:
: Let me backtrack: Why, yes! Yes I _did_ say Hmmmmmm to you.
:
: No charge, sir.
:
:
:
: --
: gekko
:
: A boss is a personal dictator appointed to those of us fortunate
: enough to live in free societies. (from the Cynic's Dictionary)
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [CROWD] The Consistency of the Gang
- From: Dr Zen
- Re: [CROWD] The Consistency of the Gang
- References:
- [CROWD] The Consistency of the Gang
- From: gekko
- Re: [CROWD] The Consistency of the Gang
- From: Jackson Pillock
- Re: [CROWD] The Consistency of the Gang
- From: gekko
- Re: [CROWD] The Consistency of the Gang
- From: Jackson Pillock
- Re: [CROWD] The Consistency of the Gang
- From: gekko
- Re: [CROWD] The Consistency of the Gang
- From: Jackson Pillock
- Re: [CROWD] The Consistency of the Gang
- From: gekko
- [CROWD] The Consistency of the Gang
- Prev by Date: Re: Pencil poast
- Next by Date: Re: Pencil poast
- Previous by thread: Re: [CROWD] The Consistency of the Gang
- Next by thread: Re: [CROWD] The Consistency of the Gang
- Index(es):
Loading