BYTE BACKKFNX1100AM Listen Live
BLOND AND HARMONIZED GETTING IT RIGHT AGAINST THE RIGHT firstname.lastname@example.org
February 05, 2003
THE LAST WORD
From Gary Utter in my comments (search for his name or look below for context)
OK I get the last word because it's my blog [ooh, the power:) ]and,well really I need to ask - am I troll. I'll go over and look at the Samizdata.net definition.
He addressed none of my points in my previous e-mail. [UPDATE: 12:35: He did at the Dean Esmay blog, though not really IMHO.
Before he wanted a discussion,
>>If you want to have a polite convesation about the problems with immigration law and the INS in general, we can do that.>>
... now he doesn't. He did not get my "ass munch" attempt at humor and I can't deal with someone who has no sense of humor. [update 12:35 - he said it was a lame attempt. I agree. Big deal. Next real point.]
I did e-mail him yesterday - what I made it up? [update 12:35 - he posted a copy so he did] Why wouldn't I e-mail him. I used that address up there. Without the "NOSPAM," of course, which I actually put in to prevent his address being spidered. Aren't I nice?
Anybody who can say the following with a straight face is a joke: I did not, in fact, call you ANY names. I stated that you were of low moral character and had no respect for the truth, and with every post, you bear show both statements to be valid.
Yes, I did just call him a joke.
damn. I just noticed he said he posted it here and there at both blogs. Can I resist? Go to DeanEsmay.com and find out.
He put his comments in my question about my Canadian visitor. Does that mean that is he?
My journey for a reasonable and semi-serious debate continues.... I've stopped holding my breath. Sheebers. Polarization really does not help find solutions. Sure we all slip, but his posts seem to be on a downward spiral.
[update 12:35 At least he didn't make a seperate post out of it which is what I thought he meant, so he can't be all bad. He did post a 100 line [approx., No, I didn't count] response twice, however. I don't dismiss things entirely out of hand, but his latest reply is one of the exceptions I'm going to make. I guess he'd say the same of me.
I'll still read his posts - and I bet I agree with him every now and then. He doesn't appear to post much. It was his first in the last three months. I really don't understand how he's affliated. I wish I'd known that sooner.
What's your take? No not you Gary, I got that. You everyone else. Am I spinning in my own grave on my perception of this? That's not a moment of doubt, but it is a genuine query.]