🚀 go-pugleaf

Dickless Davie tholoon@antispam.ham the irrelevant Ignoranus whined and
tholed:
> Michael Baldwin, Bruce writes:
>
> >> Doesn't change the fact that you asked about an irrelevant subject,
> >> Bruce.  Still suffering from reading comprehension problems?
>
> > "Clasic" evasion,
>
> I'm well aware that your failure to answer the question constitutes
> evasion, Bruce.  No need to tell me about it.

"Clasic" illogic on your part, Dickless.

> > Are you a complete idiot or not?
>
> What does your question to a nonexistent "Dickless" have to do with
> colored text in DeScribe, Bruce?

The subject asks if you are a complete idiot or not, Dickless. I see
nothing about coloured text in DeScribe. If you had better reading
"comprehenion" skills you would know that by now.

> >> I'm well aware that you didn't answer the question, Bruce.  No need to
> >> tell me.
>
> > Note: no response.
>
> Classic illogic, given that by writing "Note: no response", you've
> responded, Bruce.

Non sequitur, Dickless.

> >>>> Who is "Dickless", Bruce?  Still suffering from attribution problems?
>
> >> Note:  no response.
>
> Note:  still no response.

"Clasic" illogic, Dickless, given that by writing "Note: still no
response", you've responded.

> >> Who is "Dickless", Malloy?  Also suffering from attribution problems?
>
> > Who is "Malloy",
>
> Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, Bruce?

You certainly are, Dickless. Why are you now calling me "Malloy"?

> >> Who is "Dickless", Malloy?  Also suffering from attribution problems?
>
> > Who is "Malloy",
>
> Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, Bruce?

You certainly are, Dickless. Why were you calling me "Malloy"?

> > And why are you calling me "Malloy"?
>
> What does your classic erroneous presupposition have to do with colored
> text in DeScribe, Bruce?

"Clasic" evasion, Dickless.

> >> Who is "Dickless", Malloy?  Also suffering from attribution problems?
>
> > Who is "Malloy",
>
> Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, Bruce?

You certainly are, Dickless. Why were you calling me "Malloy"?

> > And why are you calling me "Malloy"?
>
> What does your classic erroneous presupposition have to do with colored
> text in DeScribe, Bruce?

"Clasic" evasion, Dickless. And why were you calling me "Malloy"?
Another one of your "lassic" fuckups?

> >> Who is "Dickless", Malloy?  Also suffering from attribution problems?
>
> > Who is "Malloy",
>
> Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, Bruce?

You certainly are, Dickless. Why did you call me "Malloy"? Are you in
your usual confused mental state again? Or were you merely
hallucinating again?

> > And why are you calling me "Malloy"?
>
> What does your classic erroneous presupposition have to do with colored
> text in DeScribe, Bruce?

"lassic" evasion, Dickless. Why did you call me "Malloy"?

> >> Who is "Dickless", Malloy?  Also suffering from attribution problems?
>
> > Who is "Malloy",
>
> Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, Bruce?

You certainly are, Dickless. Why had you called me "Malloy"?

> > And why are you calling me "Malloy"?
>
> What does your classic erroneous presupposition have to do with colored
> text in DeScribe, Bruce?

Non sequitur, Dickless, and rather ironic given that you are the one
evading my questions.

> Note:  no response.

I'm well aware that you didn't answer my questions, which constitutes
evasion, Dickless.  No need to tell me about it.

> > Who is "Malloy",
>
> Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, Bruce?

You certainly are, Dickless.

> > And why are you calling me "Malloy"?
>
> What does your classic erroneous presupposition have to do with colored
> text in DeScribe, Bruce?

Non sequitur, Dickless, and rather ironic given that you called me
"Malloy".

> >>>> The subject line says "Malloy digest", Bruce.  Still suffering from
> >>>> reading comprehension problems?
>
> >>> It says "Is Dickless a complete idiot?",
>
> >> Classic dishonesty on your part, Bruce.
>
> > You mean on your part,
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

On your part, Dickless. The subject is still "Is Dickless a complete
idiot?".

> > <snip> Ooops! That's all there was!
>
> Non sequitur.

That you would make yet another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim is
indeed non sequitur, Dickless.