 | | Scott's too lazy to unsubscribe —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | (...) That's regrettable. It wasn't me though, you can be sure of that. You're close enough to my idea of a joke as it is without any external assistance required. (...) So you're too lazy or clueless to unsubscribe, then, but *not* too lazy to (...) (23 years ago, 23-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | |
| | | | | What makes larry think I am too lazy to unsubscribe? —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | | (...) Youch! An insult. (...) No. (...) Its content is mostly junk. I did not sign up for it. It is junk mail. QED. (...) In what way? I have a lot "priorities", I can't think of any which are directly related to LUGNET. (...) I have said it before, (...) (23 years ago, 23-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: What makes larry think I am too lazy to unsubscribe? —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | (...) me and *many* others, I would reconsider... but for now Mladen has received a free pass from me and I no longer directly comment on what he did or did not do, said or did not say. That Amy was gracious enough to let him off the hook for it (...) (23 years ago, 23-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: What makes larry think I am too lazy to unsubscribe? —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | | | (...) What do Mladen's comments about automobile components have to do with this? Dave! FUT: OT.Feeble.Puns (23 years ago, 23-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: What makes larry think I am too lazy to unsubscribe? —Lindsay Frederick Braun
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Don't you mean "ot.puns.feeble.dave...ve!.dave!" ? But thanks for steering it into the proper column. LFB (23 years ago, 26-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.pun)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | how to lie with statistics —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur twists reality thusly: (...) I post a lot. So any metric ought to be on a per post basis. That winnows it down significantly. Else we're saying that Johnny one post gets the nobel peace prize because his one (...) (23 years ago, 23-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: how to lie with statistics —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | | | | (...) My above comment stands. Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 24-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: how to lie with statistics —Eric Sophie
|
| | | | | | RRRRrrrrrr.... (...) Big Whoop, and, gee thanks for Dragging my name into this for no good reason. I warn you, please do not use my name at all for any reason in this forum for purposes that advance your own pleasures. I build for the sake of (...) (22 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: how to lie with statistics —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Eric Sophie writes: <snip> I stand behind what I said, (in the middle of a very involved thread) three months ago, including my analysis of what transpired when you spammed many groups. But even though I could mount a (...) (22 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Hmmm, no answer to this: (Re: Scott's too lazy to unsubscribe) —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | | Hmmm, no answer to this: "Does your supreme court agree with that view? I hear not." Scott A (23 years ago, 23-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Scott's too lazy to unsubscribe —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | (...) Interestingly, my subs has just been cancelled: ==+== You have been unsubscribed from the mailing list lp-announce by WWW form: (URL) shall miss the paranoia, I'm almost tempted to take the time to subscribe myself. Scott A (23 years ago, 23-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Scott's too lazy to unsubscribe —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | (...) That WAS me... (URL) welcome. (...) Oh please do, as that will forever put to bed any lingering question as to whether you can call it junk or not. You couldn't before I unsubbed you of course... but now you definitely cannot. (23 years ago, 23-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Scott's too lazy to unsubscribe —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | (...) What is the "You're welcome" for? Are you expecting thanks? You really are an arrogant sod. Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 23-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | No thank you! —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | (...) Well I was, but I'm not any more. I've got to stop actually taking you at your word, I really should know better. I've apologised and I'll do it again if it will help. I apologise for taking you at your word that you did not want to be on that (...) (23 years ago, 23-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: No thank you! —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | (...) Where did I say that I "did not want to receive the material"? You asked if I was too lazy to unsubscribe. I said "no". Can you not join the dots together? Scott A (23 years ago, 23-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
