Subject:
|
Re: Is lgbt dead in the water?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 15 Oct 2004 19:11:50 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1542 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Bruce Schlickbernd wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Bruce Schlickbernd wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote:
| |
Too often an imprecisely-disclaimed statement is
bludgeoned out of context, or an unintended ambiguity is taken as a
explicit forfeiture of the argument.
|
Shouldn’t that be “declaimed”, and not “disclaimed”?
|
I guess my posts could sometimes be declammed when I’ve cited too many
shellfish.
Dave!
|
Clams got legs! Unfortunately, your disclaimed/declaimed/declammed
non-sequitor doesn’t.
|
Looks like mollusc has run out.
Actually, when I first read your post, I saw “declaimed” as “declammed,” so
the non-sequitur was borne of a misreading of your sequitur.
Dave!
|
I figured as much, which is why I juxtaposed the three of them together so the
full irony would be apparent.
Of course, if ya gotta explain a joke....
-->Bruce<--
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Is lgbt dead in the water?
|
| (...) Looks like mollusc has run out. Actually, when I first read your post, I saw "declaimed" as "declammed," so the non-sequitur was borne of a misreading of your sequitur. Dave! (20 years ago, 15-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
70 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
