 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
216.196.176.121
In Reply to: RE: Not really... posted by afilado on August 23, 2007 at 14:46:02
"Is there no original thought? That's preposterous!"
Where did I write this?
Follow Ups:
who said "it is all regurgitation"? Regurgitate=throw back the same=unoriginal.
James, once more I implore you to truce. I really have no more time to teach you how to escape your dogmatic world.
Let's move on to something that's more interesting. You are a bore. There's nothing wrong with that. I'm sure your family and friends still love you.
I understand now that you have a crippled thinking and deserve sympathy rather than derision. That kind of stupidity is the fault of genetics and your local school system. You are truly a victim of sorts.
And you are not yet ready for the cure that I offer.
I'm sorry I got involved in all this and don't need any apology from you at all.
I sense your frustration that your little personal attacks have no traction.
to discern such a thing standing next to someone, much less at this distance.
I've been pondering what profession you might be in given your incredible need for structure and outside reference. Engineer? No, Post Office. Burger King! That's it. LOL.
For me it's like playing with monkeys at the zoo. All the monkey can do is jabber and toss shit. I can walk away; the monkey is still in his cage. Or like poking a slug with a stick.
Actually, I've been using you to cultivate my YECHness. I'm long past a point of emotional investment in any of this. It's just fun to see you always trying to catch up. Or catch on.
I've developed a genuine little fondness for you. I predict we'll be friends soon. Nothing would please me more.
I want to get back to movies.
...schmuck!
It's fine to disagree with someone, but it's not necessary to bloat yourself up quite so big in the process!
Elliot Berlin
You want to talk about film or fight?
I was just someone reading the thread who found the degree of your sense of superiority surprising. It was enough that way to make me feel the need to defend the side of the people who aren't as "elevated" as you.
I've had my disagreements with people on the Asylum but I hope I've not taken the tone that you have in this series of posts.
Beyond that I'd say I neither have the desire to discuss film with or fight...with you at least.
You just came into something "mid-reel" so to speak. You obviously don't know the full background of what was going on.
I thought it truly ironic that your immediate reaction was to inject yourself - uninvited,
uninformed - by using the same kind of language toward me that you objected to my using toward my budding buddy, jamesgarvin.
I forgive you and hope to earn your future admiration.
Did you see my lovenote to jamesgarvin at the top of the page?
Cheers.
c
"A bee in his bonnet". Ouch! Now that smarts.
I just have low regard for people whose chief contribution here consists mostly of mouthing habitual words. Or who display personal rancor or laziness to the neglect of the beauty of film art and a healthy discussion of it.
I admire intellectual honesty, good humor and constructive, thoughtful opinion.
Take you for example. In this case you have taken a side and just snipe from a distance. If you want to engage me in any respect having to do with film, let's go. Otherwise, butt out.
I am having a spat with jamesgarvin that I didn't intend and I'm trying to find a way out. I've offered truce but he refused. And he said he will not leave me alone. So, we'll battle until a pleasing conclusion is reached.
So far, I find you and jamesgarvin to be dullards. Parrots. You're squawkers and repeaters. Your very nature forces me to entertain myself. There's nothing fresh about you. Even your insults lack vitality. LOL.
One thing is for sure, if you can be civil towards me, I promise you I will return the courtesy.
Enlighten me or ignore me. Please.
...you know that?
You're a gentleman. I guess.
I've learned that everything is not what it appears to be here on the old internet. Usually, it takes some time to sort through things. Sorta like TV and the movies. Mostly just entertainment. Interactive, man!
Why take it personally? Especially if you're a bystander?
All my offenses - well, most - were so absurd, outrageous and intentional that I thought certainly they wouldn't be taken seriously. I'm surprised I didn't get exiled to "Outside". Well, maybe the moderator has a keener sense of humor than...........someone. Or, maybe he knew the full context. Or enjoyed a good story, unfolding. Unlike............someone.
Did you read my recent note to jamesgarvin? I had mixed feelings about writing it. Woulda been more fun and more meaningful if you and EBerlin had been patient enough to let it play out between the two of us without getting involved. We were close.
He really can take good care of himself without anyone else's help.
When you encounter me again, just pretend you have stepped into the theater. Join in. Entertain the people. Entertain me. Otherwise you risk appearing that "dullard". Like............someone. ;-)
Cheers
You had sideswiped both him and me at approximately the same time and place; I was simply calling his attention to the little gnat.
"Entertain me." Go ta hell -- does that amuse you?
clark
you to draw his attention.
You stuck your pointy nose in this.
You're a sad little hippokrit, is what you are. Very quickly you resort to the same language and tactics you find objectionable in me.
Let's talk about film.
s
nt
.
(1) "To my new friend jamesgarvin..." - nothing about film.
(2) In response to powermatic: "victim of your prejudices. I doubt you know much beyond what you read in headlines."
(3) "Be sure to also alert us when you say something of your own creation. I think I probably have time now for a good long nap."
(4) You are a bore. There's nothing wrong with that. I'm sure your family and friends still love you. I understand now that you have a crippled thinking and deserve sympathy rather than derision. That kind of stupidity is the fault of genetics and your local school system. You are truly a victim of sorts.
(5) I've been pondering what profession you might be in given your incredible need for structure and outside reference. Engineer? No, Post Office. Burger King! That's it. LOL. For me it's like playing with monkeys at the zoo. All the monkey can do is jabber and toss shit. I can walk away; the monkey is still in his cage. Or like poking a slug with a stick.
(6) So far, I find you and jamesgarvin to be dullards. Parrots. You're squawkers and repeaters. Your very nature forces me to entertain myself. There's nothing fresh about you. Even your insults lack vitality. LOL.
(7) Otherwise you risk appearing that "dullard". like............someone. ;-)
(8) You're a sad little hippokrit, is what you are.I kept the number of your references to "films" under ten so you could keep your shoes on while keeping track.
...are all my invitations to make up and move on.
You are always so selective and elusive. Intellectually dishonest. LOL.
You mean like when Germany wanted to "make up and move on" after it was reduced to rubble, or when Japan wanted to "make up and move on" after it was was chock full of crispy critters?
.
"I am having a spat with jamesgarvin that I didn't intend and I'm trying to find a way out. I've offered truce but he refused. And he said he will not leave me alone. So, we'll battle until a pleasing conclusion is reached."
Me and the Tinman have a little repartee' under my posting Quinceanera, in which you responded with the following comment: "I think most of what you say is regurgitation, or as you put it, "many others made the claim before me". Be sure to also alert us when you say something of your own creation. ;~)I think I probably have time now for a good long nap.""
Now, you were not involved in that conversation, I did not address you, refer to you, or involve you in any way. Yet you felt compelled to jump with the smarmy comment. What was it that you did not intend with that comment?
Now, what do you write to Clarke: "In this case you have taken a side and just snipe from a distance." Hmm. Sound familiar.
Under the "Breach" topic, in response to your query "which conclusion" which I provided you, your ressponse? "You'd appear a whole lot smarter if you'd address the original question with some original thought", and then the shenanigans begin. And you did not intend, what?
In this case you have taken a side and just snipe from a distance.
.
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
