Re: Help a new budding GM

From: mmmark@my-deja.com

Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2000 00:00:00 +0000

In article <8c8rqu027p6@news1.newsguy.com>,
lindahl@rt.com (Greg Lindahl) wrote:

> mmmark@my-deja.com writes:

> > Are you a card-carrying troll? :)
>
> In your case, yes.

Heh :)
Those cartoon characters who don't fall before they actually realise
the edge of the clif is way back there. That's what you remind me of
Gregory. I wondered when you finally realised you didn't have even a
shred of a case what you'd do. The options I came up with were:

a) Start talking about something else without acknowledging the last
issue at all.
b) Start swearing again
c) Show your true colours.

So it's c), you realise you've lost so now you're a troll. Even so, I
enjoy knocking you about so let's play.

> > aw... those raw nerves jangled into a spontaneous strutting display
:)
>
> Yours, you mean?

You smell, I know you do, no you do, mmmm, classy debating Gergory :)

> You were the one claiming authority based on your
> vast learning,

no I was defending myself against the accusation I didn't know what I
was talking about when I said 'statistically speaking'. Don't let the
facts get in your way though Gregory - trolls romp over those :)

> to the point where you accuse your apparent inferiors
> of not understanding what a PhD involves.

It was a fair assumption based on the fact you told me I didn't learn
much on my phd because I didn't know the acronymn for part of the US
defence set-up. ...is this argument inconvenient for you Gregory or just
a bit difficult?

> > But with that fantastic heritage Gregory you're surely not too
stupid to
> > realise you're not making sense?
>
> Uhuh. You're the one claiming a vast knowledge of statistics,

I do have a vast knowledge of statistics ... why does that upset you
Gregory?

> insulting someone else who's worked for a 3-letter agency known for
> math excellence. We won't mention his stint as a math professor at a
> top-5 US university; he's too polite to mention it himself,

He wasn't too polite to jump into a pbm debate with fists flying
accusing a person he knew nothing about of not knowning what
'statistically speaking' meant now was he?

> because he
> probably hates false claims of authority as a way to settle arguments.

Gosh, how come you get on so well when you're so very different?

So - what qualifications does one have to have in statistics in order to
be an authority in Gregory-world?

> Why? Because your argument was bogus,

um, no it wasn't.

> and he pointed it out,

no he didn't.

> and you
> didn't listen.

Yes I did. Far more closely than you by the look of things.

>So you waste his time.

He wasted his own time. I note he hasn't wasted any more of it by
supporting you when you say that knowing what IDA stands for is
important to earning a phd...

> > I hate to keep nailing you to the point Gregory..
>
> Please, continue to waste everyone's time.

It takes two to tango my dancing fool :)

> > Now: You can guess that I didn't learn much during my phd on the
> > strength of a nonsensical demand that I should know what you know
about
> > the american defence set-up. ..

> I guess you also never pay attention to the places that people who
> write papers work for?

Keep guessing Gregory.
Why do you think the location of people who write papers is a big deal?
How many of the last 100 papers in the Annals of Statistics were
authored from the IDA do you think four? two? none? Please go out on a
limb here Gregory.

> Or do you not read papers?

To steal your turn of phrase, ho ho ho ho
I think I might read one or two more than you Gregory... I think I might
have written a dozen or so more than you too Gregory :)

> You know, the ones
> in journals, not the kind that you wipe your ass with.

Getting cwoss again Gregory :)

> > Please explain why when you demonstrated xenophobia you then called
me
> > stupid for asking if you were also a racist? Much much later you
tried
> > to pretend that the xenophobia was a joke.
>
> Because it is a joke. And you *are* stupid. Just another stupid Brit.

Awww... Gregory *wipes spittle from Gregory's mouth* you be careful with
that keyboard, you'll damage it banging your fists down like that :)

Please tell me more about how I'm a stupid brit.

As a footnote, a word or two of explanation:
I've noticed how Gregory loves to jump into threads solely to put people
down. I've seen how he 'wins' his debates by never abandoning an
argument no matter how wrong he happens to be. His tactic is to reply
relentlessly with misdirection, insult and obfustration until his victim
is browbeaten into silence, gives up out of boredom or concludes that
Gregory is a wanker not worthy of their time. With another 'victory'
under his belt Gregory goes off to do whatever it is that he does to
celebrate then returns to the hunt for his next target.

Seeing that Gregory has been close to the edge of late and that he'd
blundered into this debate with even less of an argument than normal I
decided to make a stand. I decided that I would reply to every reply
until the job was done. In doing so of course I have had to adopt many
of Gregory's tactics. In essense I've held up a mirror to Gregory and it
seems pretty clear that he doesn't like what he sees.

Anyway - on with the show. Apologies to those who'd rather not be
reading this (hint - don't read it) and to those who are enjoying the
show - sit back!

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

References

Re: Help a new budding GM
mmmark@my-deja.com
Sun, 02 Apr 2000 00:00:00 +0000
Re: Help a new budding GM
lindahl@rt.com (Greg Lindahl)
Mon, 03 Apr 2000 00:00:00 +0000