New Book of Rules
in [Design]
|
From: bill.sloman on 6 Aug 2006 08:04 Phat Bytestard wrote: > On Thu, 3 Aug 2006 17:56:40 +0100, "Reg Edwards" > <g4fgq.regp(a)ZZZbtinternet.com> Gave us: > > > destroy the police force and the army, the > >power stations, > > They never had a police force. All they had was Saddam's army, and > yes, that had to be dismantled, dumbass. It had to be purged. Dismantlng it wasn't necessary, and certainly turns out to have been a very bad idea. There was some discussion of this point here before the invasion had got well underway. -- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
From: bill.sloman on 6 Aug 2006 08:13 Phat Bytestard wrote: > On 5 Aug 2006 11:13:40 -0700, bill.sloman(a)ieee.org Gave us: > > >Yes, yes - of course - but you are late for your appointment at the > >Alzheimer's clinic. Again. > > Funny... my boss seems to like my photographic memory of integrated > rack mount gear filling out ten racks just fine. I won't even need to > refer to the plans in the next iteration. Alzheimer's manifests itself in a failure to transfer data from short term memory into long term memory. What you have got in long term memory stays there, and remains accessible until the disease is very advanced. Judging from your performance here, there wouldn't be a lot of point in your referring to the plans in the next iteration, because you'd not register the new information for more than about twenty minutes. > Sorry chump, but my twilight years are a couple decades off. Not knowing your age, I don't know whether you are suffering from premature senility or congenital stupidity, not that it really matters. > Yours have obviously already arrived. So you persistently claim, without offering a shred of convincing evidence - this is your usual, singulalry un-persuasive, mode of "argument". -- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
From: John Fields on 6 Aug 2006 08:15 On Sat, 05 Aug 2006 21:48:59 +0100, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)REMOVETHIS.hotmail.com> wrote: > > >John Fields wrote: > >> On Sat, 05 Aug 2006 00:40:03 +0100, Eeyore >> <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)REMOVETHIS.hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> >John Fields wrote: >> >> >> Providential for us, as well, that you were there since you helped >> >> us in _our_ war with Germany. >> > >> >That's the most sane thing I think you've said so far in this thread. >> >> --- >> So the rest of my stuff is insane because you don't agree with it? >> ;) > >You're a great fan of turning words round inaccurately aren't you ? --- Oh, so then you _agree_ with the "insane" things I've said? -- John Fields Professional Circuit Designer
From: bill.sloman on 6 Aug 2006 08:20 Phat Bytestard wrote: > On 2 Aug 2006 19:16:01 -0700, bill.sloman(a)ieee.org Gave us: > > >Plutonium-239 has a minimum critical mass of about 10kgm versus 15kgm > >for U-235, but since the Phat Bytestards cerebral mass seems to be > >fly-weight (a few grams), we don't seem to be at much risk. > > > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_mass > > Oh boy. The puppy can read, and even knows how to cut and paste. > > > >If his brains were dynamite - which they clearly aren't - they woudn't > >blow his hat off. > > If your brains were anything other than the shitpile they are, you > would actually see how retarded your petty baby bullshit is. Dig out your own insults, you feeble plagiarist. --- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
From: John Fields on 6 Aug 2006 08:25
On Sat, 05 Aug 2006 21:54:20 +0100, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)REMOVETHIS.hotmail.com> wrote: >Appeals to you ? I thought it might. Some ppl reckon that humanity has risen above the 'law of the >jungle' but I guess a few regressions like yourself can be excused. --- When push comes to shove, if we think our lives are worth anything we'll revert to animalism and either fight or run when we're threatened, so the "law of the jungle" is very much at the core of things. -- John Fields Professional Circuit Designer |