Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: epicure who wrote (90290)	12/1/2004 6:11:37 PM
From: E	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 108807

Oh what fun, and educational, too! This is a very interesting exchange! (To some it won't be; click Next.) Because sometimes, because of how few moving parts are involved, micro-events are helpfully illustrious. You are against third party references. (So am I.) RDB, who isn't, felt like contributing a crack. Its import was that the poster, E, was behaving in a certain way the two of you could share a long-suffering tone about. You couldn't resist joining his allusion to the poster E's annoying (or whatever) behavior. "I can hope, can't I?" you wrote. I posted a chiding tease, "Oh look, a third party reference. Goodness me." This would have been an honest reaction on your part: "I guess it was, sort of, but not much of one. A small lapse, I'd call it, and how picky of you to mention it." But even though RDB, you, and I all knew it was a crack about a third party, moi, you say that If I look CAREFULLY I will see that the words are a reference to a "situation" and not -- perish the thought! -- about a person! This somehow reminds me of noun-free name calling and adjective-free insults. Referring to the word Jesuitical occurs to me, and if there were a third party near I might do it, though not regarding a person -- only about a situation. You'd be able to detect this if you looked carefully.