|
|
Re: Bad Peter Son
Posted:
Feb 12, 2010 9:13 PM
|
|
On Feb 12, 6:41 am, "Clever Dim Wort" <victor_meldrew_...@yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:
> On 12 Feb, 11:48, "Deb Paterson" <ostap_bender_1...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > > I have yet to see any post of yours on sci.math which has
> > > any mathematical substance.
>
> > Whatever.
>
> And yet another totally unmathematical posting from you.
>
It is no more "unmathematical" than your own post here. What did you
expect? That I respond to your insults by discussing the Wolfe-Klee
conjecture?
What is amazing is that you are so dense that you accuse others of
"unmathematical postings" in your own unmathematical post. Your
reasoning ability is highly underdeveloped. I bet you haven't been
able to get far in your math career.
>
> > As much as it may surprise you, I don't pay attention to your
> > attempts at "witticism".
>
> It took you long enough to recognise them as anagrams:
> slow on the uptake yet again :-(
>
> If you'd paid attention...
>
Yes, I paid no attention, but finally had to respond because you made
an issue out of my inattention to your feeble and laughable attempts
at humour. As I recall you compare your own ability to use anagram
solver web sites with Oscar Wilde's witticism, although you do
modestly state that the anagrams that you select from the anagram
solver output, are not as good as Oscar Wilde's pre-computer-age
wit.
>
> > > Although these witticisms are not in Oscar Wilde's class
>
>
> > As much as it may surprise you, I don't pay attention to your
> > attempts at "witticism". Anagrams and puns are the lowest
> > form of humour. In ten minutes, even my little son can write
> > a computer program, an anagram solver, that would generate
> > anagrams automatically. [And I bet you will brag that you are
> > such a brilliant man that you generate them with no effort.
> > What a pathetic show-off.] The fact that you have to troll Usenet
> > in order to prove your "superiority" over other human beings
> > and to apply anagram solvers to other people's nicknames to
> > show your witticism, betrays a very miserable existence.
>
> And what is is about *your* miserable existence that causes
> you to troll sci.math?
>
Since you can't read: I came to sci.math because I am teaching math to
my little son and needed some literature.
>
> > > > I came to sci.math because I am teaching math to my
> > > > little son and needed some literature.
>
> > BTW, which anagram server do you use? This one?
>
> > http://wordsmith.org/anagram/
>
> > It's quite good. It generated 9550 anagrams of my name. That will
> > suffice for you for at least two more months of posting. After that,
> > I will change my nick so that you can show off more. Here are just
> > a few for you to use in your next posts to demonstrate your superior
> > intellect:
>
> > http://wordsmith.org/anagram/anagram.cgi?anagram=ostap+bender&t=1000&a=n
>
> If you'd paid attention, ...
>
Do you think that anybody at sci.math pays attention to your laughable
child games? That's the only way you can elicit laughter in your
audience: by being laughable.
>
> ... you would have noticed I'd used most of these already.
>
Really? You have used up most of these 9550 already? In that case,
come up with a new nick for me, and look up anagrams for it.
> >
> > BTW, which anagram server do you use? This one?
>
> Have you stopped beating your wife?
>
Are you trying to tell me that instead of looking them up on a server,
you generate them by hand? If you had had any useful brains, I would
have said: "What a waste!"
|
|
