On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 11:32:31 +0000, Mark Kent wrote:
> Tim Smith <reply_in_group@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>> In article <l98665-o76.ln1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
>> Mark Kent <mark.kent@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Kier says:
>>> >>>>>> Is Mark an idiot or just round the bend?
>>>
>>> in response to (paraphrasing) does he work for the BBC? This *is*
>>> trolling, Roy!
>>
>> You didn't just ask out of the blue if he worked for the BBC. You asked
>> in the middle of the thread, in a place where the implication was that
>> he is likely astroturfing for them.
>>
>
> Implication? Only in your head, Timmy.
>
> I wanted to know if he had any real basis for his claims, or if they were
> just unsupported opinion. The question is a perfectly reasonable one,
> and is deserving of a reasonable answer.
Oh come off it.
>
> Of course I didn't just "ask out of the blue". Why would I? I don't
> ask people their parent's names, their kids' shoe sizes, the colour of
> their cars or their preferences in romantic novel authors, shakespeare,
> classical music, opera, ink versus biro pens, favourite beer, whether
> they make bread themselves or even whether they know what "face-centered
> cubic" means.
>
> Conversations, Mr Troll, go on in context. If you choose to put your
> own spin on the context (... the implication was that...) then you are
That *was* the implication.
> invention your *own* interpretation. If you want to know what the real
> reason for the question was, you can ask, except, in your case, probably
> not, as you're in my kfile for this very reason.
No, the reason he's killfiled is so you don't have to see the truth - and
if he's in your killfile, what are you doing responding to his post?
>
> Why don't you go to a group appropriate for the material you post? Oh,
> and are you still stalking Roy in Digg?
You have a funny definition of stalking.
--
Kier
|
|
