| |
| 26 Apr 2008 18:30:06 |
| Bill Hileman |
| 6410 Hits on Google |
for the phrase "Classic erroneous presupposition" I am rather shocked, actually, as I was expecting the total to be well over 10,000. |
| 27 Apr 2008 19:51:35 |
| Re: 6410 Hits on Google |
Bill Hileman <discgolfdad@gEEmail.com > writes: > for the phrase "Classic erroneous presupposition" > > I am rather shocked, actually, as I was expecting the total to be well over > 10,000. What does that have to do with college basketball, Hileman? |
| 27 Apr 2008 17:43:22 |
| Bill Hileman |
| Re: 6410 Hits on Google |
<tholen@antispam.ham > wrote in message news:4814d947$0$31721$4c368faf@roadrunner.com... > Bill Hileman <discgolfdad@gEEmail.com> writes: > >> for the phrase "Classic erroneous presupposition" >> >> I am rather shocked, actually, as I was expecting the total to be well >> over >> 10,000. > > What does that have to do with college basketball, Hileman? Absolutely nothing, and thank you for asking. |
| 27 Apr 2008 23:04:11 |
| Re: 6410 Hits on Google |
Bill Hileman <discgolfdad@gEEmail.com > writes: >>> for the phrase "Classic erroneous presupposition" >>> >>> I am rather shocked, actually, as I was expecting the total to be well >>> over >>> 10,000. >> What does that have to do with college basketball, Hileman? > Absolutely nothing, and thank you for asking. Then why did you post it to a college basketball newsgroup, Hileman? |
| 28 Apr 2008 06:33:04 |
| Bill Hileman |
| Re: 6410 Hits on Google |
<tholen@antispam.ham > wrote in message news:4815066b$0$7070$4c368faf@roadrunner.com... > Bill Hileman <discgolfdad@gEEmail.com> writes: > >>>> for the phrase "Classic erroneous presupposition" >>>> >>>> I am rather shocked, actually, as I was expecting the total to be well >>>> over >>>> 10,000. > >>> What does that have to do with college basketball, Hileman? > >> Absolutely nothing, and thank you for asking. > > Then why did you post it to a college basketball newsgroup, Hileman? No reason, and thank you for asking. |
| 28 Apr 2008 19:58:45 |
| Re: 6410 Hits on Google |
Bill Hileman <discgolfdad@gEEmail.com > writes: >>>>> for the phrase "Classic erroneous presupposition" >>>>> >>>>> I am rather shocked, actually, as I was expecting the total to be well >>>>> over >>>>> 10,000. >>>> What does that have to do with college basketball, Hileman? >>> Absolutely nothing, and thank you for asking. >> Then why did you post it to a college basketball newsgroup, Hileman? > No reason, and thank you for asking. Are you saying that it was a totally random act, with absolutely no motivation whatsoever, Hileman? |
| 28 Apr 2008 23:43:58 |
| Roy Tucker |
| Re: 6410 Hits on Google |
tholen@antispam.ham wrote: >Roy Tucker <roy.tucker@antispam.ham> writes: > >>Bill Hileman wrote: > >>>for the phrase "Classic erroneous presupposition" >>> >>>I am rather shocked, actually, as I was expecting the total to be well >>>over 10,000. > >>You did a web search. If you do a groups search, you will get over >>10,000. > >What does that have to do with college basketball, Tucker? Why do you exhibit inconsistency, Tholen, given that there are a lot of other posts in this newsgroup that do not have anything to do with college basketball, and you have not replied to them asking what they have to do with college basketball? |
| 29 Apr 2008 10:12:10 |
| Re: 6410 Hits on Google |
Roy Tucker <roy.tucker@antispam.ham > writes: >>> Bill Hileman wrote: >>>> for the phrase "Classic erroneous presupposition" >>>> >>>> I am rather shocked, actually, as I was expecting the total to be well >>>> over 10,000. >>> You did a web search. If you do a groups search, you will get over >>> 10,000. >> What does that have to do with college basketball, Tucker? > Why do you exhibit inconsistency, Tholen, given that there are a lot of > other posts in this newsgroup that do not have anything to do with college > basketball, and you have not replied to them asking what they have to do > with college basketball? Classic erroneous presupposition. |
| 29 Apr 2008 21:33:40 |
| Roy Tucker |
| Re: 6410 Hits on Google |
tholen@antispam.ham wrote: >Roy Tucker <roy.tucker@antispam.ham> writes: > >>>>Bill Hileman wrote: > >>>>>for the phrase "Classic erroneous presupposition" >>>>> >>>>>I am rather shocked, actually, as I was expecting the total to be well >>>>>over 10,000. > >>>>You did a web search. If you do a groups search, you will get over >>>>10,000. > >>>What does that have to do with college basketball, Tucker? > >>Why do you exhibit inconsistency, Tholen, given that there are a lot of >>other posts in this newsgroup that do not have anything to do with college >>basketball, and you have not replied to them asking what they have to do >>with college basketball? > >Classic erroneous presupposition. Why did you exhibit inconsistency, Tholen, given that there are a lot of other posts in this newsgroup that do not have anything to do with college basketball, and you have not replied to them asking what they have to do with college basketball? |
| 30 Apr 2008 19:20:30 |
| Art Deco |
| Re: 6410 Hits on Google |
Roy Tucker <roy.tucker@antispam.ham > wrote: >tholen@antispam.ham wrote: > >>Roy Tucker <roy.tucker@antispam.ham> writes: >> >>>>>Bill Hileman wrote: >> >>>>>>for the phrase "Classic erroneous presupposition" >>>>>> >>>>>>I am rather shocked, actually, as I was expecting the total to be well >>>>>>over 10,000. >> >>>>>You did a web search. If you do a groups search, you will get over >>>>>10,000. >> >>>>What does that have to do with college basketball, Tucker? >> >>>Why do you exhibit inconsistency, Tholen, given that there are a lot of >>>other posts in this newsgroup that do not have anything to do with college >>>basketball, and you have not replied to them asking what they have to do >>>with college basketball? >> >>Classic erroneous presupposition. > >Why did you exhibit inconsistency, Tholen, given that there are a lot of >other posts in this newsgroup that do not have anything to do with college >basketball, and you have not replied to them asking what they have to do >with college basketball? Another questions Tholen will never answer. -- "Substantiation that you regard yourself as a God to be worhsipped [sic] should be your concern, Deco." -- David Tholen |
| 01 May 2008 11:37:26 |
| Re: 6410 Hits on Google |
Art Deco <erfc@caballista.org > writes: > Roy Tucker <roy.tucker@antispam.ham> wrote: >>>>>> Bill Hileman wrote: >>>>>>> for the phrase "Classic erroneous presupposition" >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I am rather shocked, actually, as I was expecting the total to be well >>>>>>> over 10,000. >>>>>> You did a web search. If you do a groups search, you will get over >>>>>> 10,000. >>>>> What does that have to do with college basketball, Tucker? >>>> Why do you exhibit inconsistency, Tholen, given that there are a lot of >>>> other posts in this newsgroup that do not have anything to do with college >>>> basketball, and you have not replied to them asking what they have to do >>>> with college basketball? >>> Classic erroneous presupposition. >> Why did you exhibit inconsistency, Tholen, given that there are a lot of >> other posts in this newsgroup that do not have anything to do with college >> basketball, and you have not replied to them asking what they have to do >> with college basketball? > Another questions Tholen will never answer. Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, Deco? There is only one question. |
| 01 May 2008 08:28:42 |
| NB |
| Re: 6410 Hits on Google |
On Apr 29, 10:33=A0pm, Roy Tucker <roy.tuc...@antispam.ham > wrote: > tho...@antispam.ham wrote: > >Roy Tucker <roy.tuc...@antispam.ham> writes: > > >>>>Bill Hileman wrote: > > >>>>>for the phrase "Classic erroneous presupposition" > > >>>>>I am rather shocked, actually, as I was expecting the total to be wel= l > >>>>>over 10,000. > > >>>>You did a web search. =A0If you do a groups search, you will get over > >>>>10,000. > > >>>What does that have to do with college basketball, Tucker? > > >>Why do you exhibit inconsistency, Tholen, given that there are a lot of > >>other posts in this newsgroup that do not have anything to do with colle= ge > >>basketball, and you have not replied to them asking what they have to do= > >>with college basketball? > > >Classic erroneous presupposition. > > Why did you exhibit inconsistency, Tholen, given that there are a lot of > other posts in this newsgroup that do not have anything to do with college= > basketball, and you have not replied to them asking what they have to do > with college basketball? Classic example of Tholen trolling specific posters. |
| 01 May 2008 22:35:23 |
| Re: 6410 Hits on Google |
NB <nobuyout@gmail.com > writes: > Roy Tucker <roy.tucker@antispam.ham> wrote: >>>>>> Bill Hileman wrote: >>>>>>> for the phrase "Classic erroneous presupposition" >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I am rather shocked, actually, as I was expecting the total to be well >>>>>>> over 10,000. >>>>>> You did a web search. =A0If you do a groups search, you will get over >>>>>> 10,000. >>>>> What does that have to do with college basketball, Tucker? >>>> Why do you exhibit inconsistency, Tholen, given that there are a lot of >>>> other posts in this newsgroup that do not have anything to do with college >>>> basketball, and you have not replied to them asking what they have to do >>>> with college basketball? >>> Classic erroneous presupposition. >> Why did you exhibit inconsistency, Tholen, given that there are a lot of >> other posts in this newsgroup that do not have anything to do with college >> basketball, and you have not replied to them asking what they have to do >> with college basketball? > Classic example of Tholen trolling specific posters. Classic erroneous presupposition. |
| 02 May 2008 13:39:29 |
| NB |
| Re: 6410 Hits on Google |
On May 1, 6:35=A0pm, tho...@antispam.ham wrote: > NB <nobuy...@gmail.com> writes: > > Roy Tucker <roy.tuc...@antispam.ham> wrote: > >>>>>> Bill Hileman wrote: > >>>>>>> for the phrase "Classic erroneous presupposition" > > >>>>>>> I am rather shocked, actually, as I was expecting the total to be = well > >>>>>>> over 10,000. > >>>>>> You did a web search. =3DA0If you do a groups search, you will get = over > >>>>>> 10,000. > >>>>> What does that have to do with college basketball, Tucker? > >>>> Why do you exhibit inconsistency, Tholen, given that there are a lot = of > >>>> other posts in this newsgroup that do not have anything to do with co= llege > >>>> basketball, and you have not replied to them asking what they have to= do > >>>> with college basketball? > >>> Classic erroneous presupposition. > >> Why did you exhibit inconsistency, Tholen, given that there are a lot o= f > >> other posts in this newsgroup that do not have anything to do with coll= ege > >> basketball, and you have not replied to them asking what they have to d= o > >> with college basketball? > > Classic example of Tholen trolling specific posters. > > Classic erroneous presupposition. Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim from Tholen. |
| 02 May 2008 22:20:19 |
| Re: 6410 Hits on Google |
NB <nobuyout@gmail.com > writes: >>> Roy Tucker <roy.tucker@antispam.ham> wrote: >>>>>>>> Bill Hileman wrote: >>>>>>>>> for the phrase "Classic erroneous presupposition" >>>>>>>>> I am rather shocked, actually, as I was expecting the total to be well >>>>>>>>> over 10,000. >>>>>>>> You did a web search. =3DA0If you do a groups search, you will get over >>>>>>>> 10,000. >>>>>>> What does that have to do with college basketball, Tucker? >>>>>> Why do you exhibit inconsistency, Tholen, given that there are a lot of >>>>>> other posts in this newsgroup that do not have anything to do with college >>>>>> basketball, and you have not replied to them asking what they have to do >>>>>> with college basketball? >>>>> Classic erroneous presupposition. >>>> Why did you exhibit inconsistency, Tholen, given that there are a lot of >>>> other posts in this newsgroup that do not have anything to do with college >>>> basketball, and you have not replied to them asking what they have to do >>>> with college basketball? >>> Classic example of Tholen trolling specific posters. >> Classic erroneous presupposition. > Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim from Tholen. Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim from nobuyout. |
| 02 May 2008 18:55:02 |
| Art Deco |
| Re: 6410 Hits on Google |
:nelohT >Art Deco <erfc@caballista.org> writes: > >> Roy Tucker <roy.tucker@antispam.ham> wrote: > >>>>>>> Bill Hileman wrote: > >>>>>>>> for the phrase "Classic erroneous presupposition" >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I am rather shocked, actually, as I was expecting the total to be well >>>>>>>> over 10,000. > >>>>>>> You did a web search. If you do a groups search, you will get over >>>>>>> 10,000. > >>>>>> What does that have to do with college basketball, Tucker? > >>>>> Why do you exhibit inconsistency, Tholen, given that there are a lot of >>>>> other posts in this newsgroup that do not have anything to do with college >>>>> basketball, and you have not replied to them asking what they have to do >>>>> with college basketball? > >>>> Classic erroneous presupposition. > >>> Why did you exhibit inconsistency, Tholen, given that there are a lot of >>> other posts in this newsgroup that do not have anything to do with college >>> basketball, and you have not replied to them asking what they have to do >>> with college basketball? > >> Another question Tholen will never answer. > >Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, Deco? There is >only one question. Classic erroneous presupposition. Classic evasion. -- "Substantiation that you regard yourself as a God to be worhsipped [sic] should be your concern, Deco." -- David Tholen |
| 03 May 2008 09:02:28 |
| Re: 6410 Hits on Google |
Art Deco <erfc@caballista.org > writes: > :nelohT Still suffering from attribution problems, Deco? >>> Roy Tucker <roy.tucker@antispam.ham> wrote: >>>>>>>> Bill Hileman wrote: >>>>>>>>> for the phrase "Classic erroneous presupposition" >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I am rather shocked, actually, as I was expecting the total to be well >>>>>>>>> over 10,000. >>>>>>>> You did a web search. If you do a groups search, you will get over >>>>>>>> 10,000. >>>>>>> What does that have to do with college basketball, Tucker? >>>>>> Why do you exhibit inconsistency, Tholen, given that there are a lot of >>>>>> other posts in this newsgroup that do not have anything to do with college >>>>>> basketball, and you have not replied to them asking what they have to do >>>>>> with college basketball? >>>>> Classic erroneous presupposition. >>>> Why did you exhibit inconsistency, Tholen, given that there are a lot of >>>> other posts in this newsgroup that do not have anything to do with college >>>> basketball, and you have not replied to them asking what they have to do >>>> with college basketball? >>> Another question Tholen will never answer. >> Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, Deco? There is >> only one question. > Classic erroneous presupposition. Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. > Classic evasion. I'm well aware that you didn't answer the question, Deco, which constitutes evasion. No need to tell me about it. |
| 03 May 2008 09:13:26 |
| Art Deco |
| Re: 6410 Hits on Google |
:nelohT >Art Deco <erfc@caballista.org> writes: > >> :nelohT > >>>> Roy Tucker <roy.tucker@antispam.ham> wrote: > >>>>>>>>> Bill Hileman wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> for the phrase "Classic erroneous presupposition" >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I am rather shocked, actually, as I was expecting the total to be >>>>>>>>>> well >>>>>>>>>> over 10,000. > >>>>>>>>> You did a web search. If you do a groups search, you will get over >>>>>>>>> 10,000. > >>>>>>>> What does that have to do with college basketball, Tucker? > >>>>>>> Why do you exhibit inconsistency, Tholen, given that there are a lot of >>>>>>> other posts in this newsgroup that do not have anything to do with >>>>>>> college >>>>>>> basketball, and you have not replied to them asking what they have to do >>>>>>> with college basketball? > >>>>>> Classic erroneous presupposition. > >>>>> Why did you exhibit inconsistency, Tholen, given that there are a lot of >>>>> other posts in this newsgroup that do not have anything to do with >>>>> college >>>>> basketball, and you have not replied to them asking what they have to do >>>>> with college basketball? > >>>> Another question Tholen will never answer. > >>> Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, Deco? There is >>> only one question. > >> Classic erroneous presupposition. > >Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. > >> Classic evasion. > >I'm well aware that you didn't answer the question, Deco, which >constitutes evasion. I'm well aware that you didn't answer and evaded the question about your inconsistency about replying to other posts that do not have anything to do with college basketball, Tholen. No need to remind me. >No need to tell me about it. Non sequitur. -- "Substantiation that you regard yourself as a God to be worhsipped [sic] should be your concern, Deco." -- David Tholen |
| 03 May 2008 19:48:37 |
| Re: 6410 Hits on Google |
Art Deco <erfc@caballista.org > writes: > :nelohT Still suffering from attribution problems, Deco? >>> :nelohT >>>>> Roy Tucker <roy.tucker@antispam.ham> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Bill Hileman wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> for the phrase "Classic erroneous presupposition" >>>>>>>>>>> I am rather shocked, actually, as I was expecting the total to be >>>>>>>>>>> well >>>>>>>>>>> over 10,000. >>>>>>>>>> You did a web search. If you do a groups search, you will get over >>>>>>>>>> 10,000. >>>>>>>>> What does that have to do with college basketball, Tucker? >>>>>>>> Why do you exhibit inconsistency, Tholen, given that there are a lot of >>>>>>>> other posts in this newsgroup that do not have anything to do with >>>>>>>> college >>>>>>>> basketball, and you have not replied to them asking what they have to do >>>>>>>> with college basketball? >>>>>>> Classic erroneous presupposition. >>>>>> Why did you exhibit inconsistency, Tholen, given that there are a lot of >>>>>> other posts in this newsgroup that do not have anything to do with >>>>>> college >>>>>> basketball, and you have not replied to them asking what they have to do >>>>>> with college basketball? >>>>> Another question Tholen will never answer. >>>> Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, Deco? There is >>>> only one question. >>> Classic erroneous presupposition. >> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. Note: no response. >>> Classic evasion. >> I'm well aware that you didn't answer the question, Deco, which >> constitutes evasion. > I'm well aware that you didn't answer and evaded the question about > your inconsistency about replying to other posts that do not have > anything to do with college basketball, Tholen. No need to remind me. Classic erroneous presupposition. >> No need to tell me about it. > Non sequitur. Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. |
| 03 May 2008 14:30:43 |
| Art Deco |
| Re: 6410 Hits on Google |
:nelohT >Art Deco <erfc@caballista.org> writes: > >> :nelohT > >Still suffering from attribution problems, Deco? Response. > >>>> :nelohT > >>>>>> Roy Tucker <roy.tucker@antispam.ham> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>> Bill Hileman wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>> for the phrase "Classic erroneous presupposition" > >>>>>>>>>>>> I am rather shocked, actually, as I was expecting the total to be >>>>>>>>>>>> well >>>>>>>>>>>> over 10,000. > >>>>>>>>>>> You did a web search. If you do a groups search, you will get over >>>>>>>>>>> 10,000. > >>>>>>>>>> What does that have to do with college basketball, Tucker? > >>>>>>>>> Why do you exhibit inconsistency, Tholen, given that there are a lot >>>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>> other posts in this newsgroup that do not have anything to do with >>>>>>>>> college >>>>>>>>> basketball, and you have not replied to them asking what they have to >>>>>>>>> do >>>>>>>>> with college basketball? > >>>>>>>> Classic erroneous presupposition. > >>>>>>> Why did you exhibit inconsistency, Tholen, given that there are a lot >>>>>>> of >>>>>>> other posts in this newsgroup that do not have anything to do with >>>>>>> college >>>>>>> basketball, and you have not replied to them asking what they have to >>>>>>> do >>>>>>> with college basketball? > >>>>>> Another question Tholen will never answer. > >>>>> Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, Deco? There is >>>>> only one question. > >>>> Classic erroneous presupposition. > >>> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. > >Note: no response. Response. > >>>> Classic evasion. > >>> I'm well aware that you didn't answer the question, Deco, which >>> constitutes evasion. > >> I'm well aware that you didn't answer and evaded the question about >> your inconsistency about replying to other posts that do not have >> anything to do with college basketball, Tholen. No need to remind me. > >Classic erroneous presupposition. Response. > >>> No need to tell me about it. > >> Non sequitur. > >Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. Classic pontification. > -- "Substantiation that you regard yourself as a God to be worhsipped [sic] should be your concern, Deco." -- David Tholen |
| 03 May 2008 20:41:47 |
| Re: 6410 Hits on Google |
Art Deco <erfc@caballista.org > writes: > :nelohT Still suffering from attribution problems, Deco? >>> :nelohT >> Still suffering from attribution problems, Deco? > Response. I see that you didn't answer the question, Deco. No surprise there, really. >>>>> :nelohT >>>>>>> Roy Tucker <roy.tucker@antispam.ham> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> Bill Hileman wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> for the phrase "Classic erroneous presupposition" >>>>>>>>>>>>> I am rather shocked, actually, as I was expecting the total to be >>>>>>>>>>>>> well >>>>>>>>>>>>> over 10,000. >>>>>>>>>>>> You did a web search. If you do a groups search, you will get over >>>>>>>>>>>> 10,000. >>>>>>>>>>> What does that have to do with college basketball, Tucker? >>>>>>>>>> Why do you exhibit inconsistency, Tholen, given that there are a lot >>>>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>>> other posts in this newsgroup that do not have anything to do with >>>>>>>>>> college >>>>>>>>>> basketball, and you have not replied to them asking what they have to >>>>>>>>>> do >>>>>>>>>> with college basketball? >>>>>>>>> Classic erroneous presupposition. >>>>>>>> Why did you exhibit inconsistency, Tholen, given that there are a lot >>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>> other posts in this newsgroup that do not have anything to do with >>>>>>>> college >>>>>>>> basketball, and you have not replied to them asking what they have to >>>>>>>> do >>>>>>>> with college basketball? >>>>>>> Another question Tholen will never answer. >>>>>> Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, Deco? There is >>>>>> only one question. >>>>> Classic erroneous presupposition. >>>> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. >> Note: no response. > Response. I see that you didn't answer the question, Deco. No surprise there, really. >>>>> Classic evasion. >>>> I'm well aware that you didn't answer the question, Deco, which >>>> constitutes evasion. >>> I'm well aware that you didn't answer and evaded the question about >>> your inconsistency about replying to other posts that do not have >>> anything to do with college basketball, Tholen. No need to remind me. >> Classic erroneous presupposition. > Response. I see that you didn't answer the question, Deco. No surprise there, really. >>>> No need to tell me about it. >>> Non sequitur. >> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. > Classic pontification. On your part, Deco. |
| 03 May 2008 15:02:31 |
| Art Deco |
| Re: 6410 Hits on Google |
:nelohT >> :nelohT > >>>> :nelohT > >>> Still suffering from attribution problems, Deco? > >> Response. > >I see that you didn't answer the question, Deco. No surprise there, >really. How ironic, given that you never answer questions asked of you, Tholen. > >>>>>> :nelohT > >>>>>>>> Roy Tucker <roy.tucker@antispam.ham> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Bill Hileman wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> for the phrase "Classic erroneous presupposition" > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am rather shocked, actually, as I was expecting the total to be >>>>>>>>>>>>>> well >>>>>>>>>>>>>> over 10,000. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> You did a web search. If you do a groups search, you will get >over >>>>>>>>>>>>> 10,000. > >>>>>>>>>>>> What does that have to do with college basketball, Tucker? > >>>>>>>>>>> Why do you exhibit inconsistency, Tholen, given that there are a lot >>>>>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>>>> other posts in this newsgroup that do not have anything to do with >>>>>>>>>>> college >>>>>>>>>>> basketball, and you have not replied to them asking what they have >>>>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>>> do >>>>>>>>>>> with college basketball? > >>>>>>>>>> Classic erroneous presupposition. > >>>>>>>>> Why did you exhibit inconsistency, Tholen, given that there are a lot >>>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>> other posts in this newsgroup that do not have anything to do with >>>>>>>>> college >>>>>>>>> basketball, and you have not replied to them asking what they have to >>>>>>>>> do >>>>>>>>> with college basketball? > >>>>>>>> Another question Tholen will never answer. > >>>>>>> Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, Deco? There is >>>>>>> only one question. > >>>>>> Classic erroneous presupposition. > >>>>> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. > >>> Note: no response. > >> Response. > >I see that you didn't answer the question, Deco. No surprise there, >really. How ironic, given that you never answer questions asked of you, Tholen. > >>>>>> Classic evasion. > >>>>> I'm well aware that you didn't answer the question, Deco, which >>>>> constitutes evasion. > >>>> I'm well aware that you didn't answer and evaded the question about >>>> your inconsistency about replying to other posts that do not have >>>> anything to do with college basketball, Tholen. No need to remind me. > >>> Classic erroneous presupposition. > >> Response. > >I see that you didn't answer the question, Deco. No surprise there, >really. How ironic, given that you never answer questions asked of you, Tholen. > >>>>> No need to tell me about it. > >>>> Non sequitur. > >>> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. > >> Classic pontification. > >On your part, Deco. Incorrect, Tholen. -- "Substantiation that you regard yourself as a God to be worhsipped [sic] should be your concern, Deco." -- David Tholen |
| 03 May 2008 22:34:40 |
| Re: 6410 Hits on Google |
Art Deco <erfc@caballista.org > writes: > :nelohT Still suffering from attribution problems, Deco? >>> :nelohT >>>>> :nelohT >>>> Still suffering from attribution problems, Deco? >>> Response. >> I see that you didn't answer the question, Deco. No surprise there, >> really. > How ironic, given that you never answer questions asked of you, Tholen. Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. >>>>>>> :nelohT >>>>>>>>> Roy Tucker <roy.tucker@antispam.ham> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bill Hileman wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for the phrase "Classic erroneous presupposition" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am rather shocked, actually, as I was expecting the total to be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> well >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> over 10,000. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> You did a web search. If you do a groups search, you will get over >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 10,000. >>>>>>>>>>>>> What does that have to do with college basketball, Tucker? >>>>>>>>>>>> Why do you exhibit inconsistency, Tholen, given that there are a lot >>>>>>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>>>>> other posts in this newsgroup that do not have anything to do with >>>>>>>>>>>> college >>>>>>>>>>>> basketball, and you have not replied to them asking what they have >>>>>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>>>> do >>>>>>>>>>>> with college basketball? >>>>>>>>>>> Classic erroneous presupposition. >>>>>>>>>> Why did you exhibit inconsistency, Tholen, given that there are a lot >>>>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>>> other posts in this newsgroup that do not have anything to do with >>>>>>>>>> college >>>>>>>>>> basketball, and you have not replied to them asking what they have to >>>>>>>>>> do >>>>>>>>>> with college basketball? >>>>>>>>> Another question Tholen will never answer. >>>>>>>> Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, Deco? There is >>>>>>>> only one question. >>>>>>> Classic erroneous presupposition. >>>>>> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. >>>> Note: no response. >>> Response. >> I see that you didn't answer the question, Deco. No surprise there, >> really. > How ironic, given that you never answer questions asked of you, Tholen. Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. >>>>>>> Classic evasion. >>>>>> I'm well aware that you didn't answer the question, Deco, which >>>>>> constitutes evasion. >>>>> I'm well aware that you didn't answer and evaded the question about >>>>> your inconsistency about replying to other posts that do not have >>>>> anything to do with college basketball, Tholen. No need to remind me. >>>> Classic erroneous presupposition. >>> Response. >> I see that you didn't answer the question, Deco. No surprise there, >> really. > How ironic, given that you never answer questions asked of you, Tholen. Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. >>>>>> No need to tell me about it. >>>>> Non sequitur. >>>> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. >>> Classic pontification. >> On your part, Deco. > Incorrect, Tholen. Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. |
| 03 May 2008 17:03:40 |
| Art Deco |
| Re: 6410 Hits on Google |
:nelohT >> :nelohT > >>>> :nelohT > >>>>>> :nelohT > >>>>> Still suffering from attribution problems, Deco? > >>>> Response. > >>> I see that you didn't answer the question, Deco. No surprise there, >>> really. > >> How ironic, given that you never answer questions asked of you, Tholen. > >Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. Incorrect, Tholen, given that you avoid answering any questions put to you by replying with a question of your own. Ironically, you then expect other people to answer your questions. > >>>>>>>> :nelohT > >>>>>>>>>> Roy Tucker <roy.tucker@antispam.ham> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bill Hileman wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for the phrase "Classic erroneous presupposition" > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am rather shocked, actually, as I was expecting the total to >be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> well >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> over 10,000. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You did a web search. If you do a groups search, you will get >over >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 10,000. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> What does that have to do with college basketball, Tucker? > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Why do you exhibit inconsistency, Tholen, given that there are a >lot >>>>>>>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>>>>>> other posts in this newsgroup that do not have anything to do with >>>>>>>>>>>>> college >>>>>>>>>>>>> basketball, and you have not replied to them asking what they have >>>>>>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>>>>> do >>>>>>>>>>>>> with college basketball? > >>>>>>>>>>>> Classic erroneous presupposition. > >>>>>>>>>>> Why did you exhibit inconsistency, Tholen, given that there are a >>>>>>>>>>> lot >>>>>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>>>> other posts in this newsgroup that do not have anything to do with >>>>>>>>>>> college >>>>>>>>>>> basketball, and you have not replied to them asking what they have >>>>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>>> do >>>>>>>>>>> with college basketball? > >>>>>>>>>> Another question Tholen will never answer. > >>>>>>>>> Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, Deco? There is >>>>>>>>> only one question. > >>>>>>>> Classic erroneous presupposition. > >>>>>>> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. > >>>>> Note: no response. > >>>> Response. > >>> I see that you didn't answer the question, Deco. No surprise there, >>> really. > >> How ironic, given that you never answer questions asked of you, Tholen. > >Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. Incorrect, Tholen, given that you avoid answering any questions put to you by replying with a question of your own. Ironically, you then expect other people to answer your questions. > >>>>>>>> Classic evasion. > >>>>>>> I'm well aware that you didn't answer the question, Deco, which >>>>>>> constitutes evasion. > >>>>>> I'm well aware that you didn't answer and evaded the question about >>>>>> your inconsistency about replying to other posts that do not have >>>>>> anything to do with college basketball, Tholen. No need to remind me. > >>>>> Classic erroneous presupposition. > >>>> Response. > >>> I see that you didn't answer the question, Deco. No surprise there, >>> really. > >> How ironic, given that you never answer questions asked of you, Tholen. > >Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. Incorrect, Tholen, given that you avoid answering any questions put to you by replying with a question of your own. Ironically, you then expect other people to answer your questions. > >>>>>>> No need to tell me about it. > >>>>>> Non sequitur. > >>>>> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. > >>>> Classic pontification. > >>> On your part, Deco. > >> Incorrect, Tholen. > >Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. On your part, Tholen. -- "Substantiation that you regard yourself as a God to be worhsipped [sic] should be your concern, Deco." -- David Tholen |
| 03 May 2008 23:47:50 |
| Re: 6410 Hits on Google |
Art Deco <erfc@caballista.org > writes: > :nelohT Still suffering from attribution problems, Deco? >>> :nelohT >>>>> :nelohT >>>>>>> :nelohT >>>>>> Still suffering from attribution problems, Deco? >>>>> Response. >>>> I see that you didn't answer the question, Deco. No surprise there, >>>> really. >>> How ironic, given that you never answer questions asked of you, Tholen. >> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. > Incorrect, Tholen, Another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. > given that you avoid answering any questions put to > you by replying with a question of your own. Another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. > Ironically, you then > expect other people to answer your questions. Classic erroneous presupposition. >>>>>>>>> :nelohT >>>>>>>>>>> Roy Tucker <roy.tucker@antispam.ham> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bill Hileman wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for the phrase "Classic erroneous presupposition" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am rather shocked, actually, as I was expecting the total to be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> well >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> over 10,000. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You did a web search. If you do a groups search, you will get over >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 10,000. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What does that have to do with college basketball, Tucker? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why do you exhibit inconsistency, Tholen, given that there are a lot >>>>>>>>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> other posts in this newsgroup that do not have anything to do with >>>>>>>>>>>>>> college >>>>>>>>>>>>>> basketball, and you have not replied to them asking what they have >>>>>>>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> do >>>>>>>>>>>>>> with college basketball? >>>>>>>>>>>>> Classic erroneous presupposition. >>>>>>>>>>>> Why did you exhibit inconsistency, Tholen, given that there are a >>>>>>>>>>>> lot >>>>>>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>>>>> other posts in this newsgroup that do not have anything to do with >>>>>>>>>>>> college >>>>>>>>>>>> basketball, and you have not replied to them asking what they have >>>>>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>>>> do >>>>>>>>>>>> with college basketball? >>>>>>>>>>> Another question Tholen will never answer. >>>>>>>>>> Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, Deco? There is >>>>>>>>>> only one question. >>>>>>>>> Classic erroneous presupposition. >>>>>>>> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. >>>>>> Note: no response. >>>>> Response. >>>> I see that you didn't answer the question, Deco. No surprise there, >>>> really. >>> How ironic, given that you never answer questions asked of you, Tholen. >> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. > Incorrect, Tholen, Another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. > given that you avoid answering any questions put to > you by replying with a question of your own. Another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. > Ironically, you then > expect other people to answer your questions. Classic erroneous presupposition. >>>>>>>>> Classic evasion. >>>>>>>> I'm well aware that you didn't answer the question, Deco, which >>>>>>>> constitutes evasion. >>>>>>> I'm well aware that you didn't answer and evaded the question about >>>>>>> your inconsistency about replying to other posts that do not have >>>>>>> anything to do with college basketball, Tholen. No need to remind me. >>>>>> Classic erroneous presupposition. >>>>> Response. >>>> I see that you didn't answer the question, Deco. No surprise there, >>>> really. >>> How ironic, given that you never answer questions asked of you, Tholen. >> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. > Incorrect, Tholen, Another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. > given that you avoid answering any questions put to > you by replying with a question of your own. Another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. > Ironically, you then > expect other people to answer your questions. Classic erroneous presupposition. >>>>>>>> No need to tell me about it. >>>>>>> Non sequitur. >>>>>> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. >>>>> Classic pontification. >>>> On your part, Deco. >>> Incorrect, Tholen. >> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. > On your part, Tholen. Another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. |