- Thread starter
- #21
D
Death
DanS wrote:
> Death wrote in
> news:4bd1939a$1@news.x-privat.org:
>
>> DanS wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>> LMAO It's much faster? Lie...both are as fast as u
>>>>>>>> can click, liar. How is it easier to show hidden
>>>>>>>> files? Both require a tick mark be checked.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ctrl-H does it in Nautilus, but a Linux expert such as
>>>>>>> yourself should know that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I see you found a few minutes to waste again.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm glad you admit it.
>>>>>
>>>>>> "I'm done with you" means ?
>>>>>
>>>>> ....in that thread....I was wrong.
>>>>
>>>> Yes you were.
>>>
>>> Look at that!! You complained that I creatively snipped
>>> (which I didn't) and isn't that what you're doing here ?
>>>
>>
>> Which you did, buttmunch ... what good for the goose isn't
>> good for the gander?
>
> Actually, I didn't creatively snip anything. I copied and
> pasted your oscenity filled baby-talk ranting and saying they
> weren't opinions worth arguing.
>
> That's a lot different from actually replying, and then
> deleting what you did to make it look like you were replying
> to something I never said.
>
> Classic.
Let it go.
You selectively took a portion you wished to address, snipping the
relevant part.
Without my colorful additions, these useless threads loose entertainment
value ... of course a moron like yourself sees these threads as "serious
discussions".
I've yet to see a baby call anyone a fucking moron ... if that's baby
talk to you, then you're seriously deranged.
--
Vita brevis breviter in brevi finietur,
Mors venit velociter quae neminem veretur.
> Death wrote in
> news:4bd1939a$1@news.x-privat.org:
>
>> DanS wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>> LMAO It's much faster? Lie...both are as fast as u
>>>>>>>> can click, liar. How is it easier to show hidden
>>>>>>>> files? Both require a tick mark be checked.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ctrl-H does it in Nautilus, but a Linux expert such as
>>>>>>> yourself should know that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I see you found a few minutes to waste again.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm glad you admit it.
>>>>>
>>>>>> "I'm done with you" means ?
>>>>>
>>>>> ....in that thread....I was wrong.
>>>>
>>>> Yes you were.
>>>
>>> Look at that!! You complained that I creatively snipped
>>> (which I didn't) and isn't that what you're doing here ?
>>>
>>
>> Which you did, buttmunch ... what good for the goose isn't
>> good for the gander?
>
> Actually, I didn't creatively snip anything. I copied and
> pasted your oscenity filled baby-talk ranting and saying they
> weren't opinions worth arguing.
>
> That's a lot different from actually replying, and then
> deleting what you did to make it look like you were replying
> to something I never said.
>
> Classic.
Let it go.
You selectively took a portion you wished to address, snipping the
relevant part.
Without my colorful additions, these useless threads loose entertainment
value ... of course a moron like yourself sees these threads as "serious
discussions".
I've yet to see a baby call anyone a fucking moron ... if that's baby
talk to you, then you're seriously deranged.
--
Vita brevis breviter in brevi finietur,
Mors venit velociter quae neminem veretur.