🚀 go-pugleaf

"S. A. Maas" <smaas@concentric.net> writes:
>Linda S. Berris wrote:
>>
>
>Linda, you did indeed overstate your case and overreact. I took my lumps for
>my stupid remark, however

How about taking your lumps for not hitting the return key at the end
of a line?

IMHO you took your lumps somewhat less than gracefully

earlier you wrote:
> Actually, if we may remove her overstatement, hysteria, and invalid
> assumptions, Linda is probably right.  I don't know what came over
> me.  Perhaps my lack of tolerance for illiteracy momentarily overcame
> my lack of tolerance for intolerance.
> We all screw up occasionally.  Sorry.

took you lumps with a good two or three jabs and a defensive move thown 
in.

>innocently intended.

The point was raised, why not via email?

> Now, grow up and take your lumps for your stupid remarks.

While I agree that the volume of her remarks was a bit much it is clear
to me from this discussion that they were not stupid

>* Steve Maas                 s.maas@ieee.org *

Robert Morphis
__________________________________________________________________
Come on ! Where's the Minority women in science ?? We're supposed
to argue !! The reason there's a minority of women in science is
cause the female mind can't understand science. Science shows the
female to have a reversed brain from the man, her left cerebral 
cortex is larger than her right...with men it's opposite . There
has never been a female Einstein and there never will be...not even
close . The closest a female can get is to memorize science but unlike
men she can't conceptualise ( a walking book) science . This is not a put
down this is a put in your place . They were put on this earth not to
do science . What of the exceptions ? The .01% ? Let'm go to school,
compete with all others and if they score at the top then let them be
at the top ( but no tricks...AA/EEOC)
______________altavoz@azstarnet.com  says above________