Re: Beware of high tech running amok

On Feb 27, 4:28=A0pm, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 (Brent P)
wrote:
> In article
<0c038c8f-35aa-4b9a-894d-d5badf71d...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, Ed Pirrero wrote:
> > On Feb 27, 4:05=A0pm, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 (Brent P)
> > wrote:
> >> In article
<34b87ba9-c84f-4a0d-a38e-856539135...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, Ed Pirrero wrote:
> >> > On Feb 27, 7:02=A0am, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 (Brent P)
> >> > wrote:
> >> >> In article <rbsas356ecr4p71ih7jcn8j061bhkfc...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, Scott in
So=
Cal wrote:
>
> >> >> How many times
> >> >> have I made something up out of the blue scott? ZERO. Ya think
there=

> >> >> would be just a little respect.
> >> > LOL. =A0That's reason you don't get respect. =A0If the conclusions
yo=
u
> >> > reached made sense from the data you presented, you *would* get
> >> > respect.
>
> >> You mean like...[snipped argumentative crap]
>
> > Yeah, just like that. =A0Or whatever. =A0Obviously you never have
though=
t
> > about it much.
> > The fact that you happen to hit on a few true facts every now and then
> > isn't surprising. =A0Hell, anyone with as much free time as you seem
to
> > have might find some nuggets of truth. =A0Just from the sheer volume
of
> > crap you spew out, some good must come. =A0Sorta like fertilizer, I
> > guess.
> > Instead of knee-jerk defensive sermonizing, why not examine the why of
> > why you seem to get so little respect. =A0Even when you do actually
> > present true facts.
>
> That was predictable.... Like always I produce the cite and like always
> you spew insults back.


Maybe it's because of your ****y, paranoid attitude?

Maybe it's because of the natural tendency of folks to disbelieve
someone who obviously has a bigger agenda?

Or maybe it's because you are generally abrasive, holier-than-thou and
incredibly defensive, all at the same time?

The reason you have so much free time is abundantly clear.

E.P.