Re: MD Squonk wrote a Review

From: SQUONKSTAIL@aol.com
Date: Mon Mar 10 2003 - 22:24:35 GMT

  • Next message: SQUONKSTAIL@aol.com: "Re: MD Squonk wrote a Review"

    You've contributed nothing but insults, derision and a condescension towards
    this forum for months now. If Struan can be banned for doing the same, I
    don't see why you can't. At least Struan backed up his statements, instead
    of rolling his eyes at us and lamenting that we just aren't good enough.
     
    I used to find you at least entertaining. That is no longer the case.
     
    Deeply disappointed,
    -Kevin

    Hello Kevin,
    If you feel Quality is real, as i do, then you may talk about it as such.
    I feel Quality is real because experience tells me it is so. I assume you
    feel the same?
    The analogue of God has been used for many things, but i do not induce God to
    write a review of Matt's essay! He's got enough on his plate as it is after
    all.
    I talk about that which i experience as real, and as i say, experience tells
    me Quality is real.
    If you feel Quality is not real, please explain what i take for Quality but
    is in fact something else?

    Matt's essay and conduct in the forum:
    In my view, Matt got burned. He came back with a vengeance. The forum pays.
    End of.
    That's a social pattern trying to encapsulate an intellectual postulate: the
    MoQ. It is therefore immoral.

    If you feel intellectual patterns should pander to social nicety, please tell
    me why?

    squonk.

    MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
    http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Mar 10 2003 - 22:25:14 GMT