Reply #73: Well, its a new day, and you're still not correct.

[Selwynn]

I was not presuming that you didn't know about 8 other threads. Stating my opinion that you are wrong to presume that what YOU have to say on the matter is so special that it deserves a special thread. Especially since in the last week the board has been flodded with these kinds of threads.

Note that unlike you, I am not having a problem of misinterpreting the intent behind the post, becaause also unlike you, I didn't come in assuming that if you disagree with me, it becuase you didn't bother to read.

Think there's an eight page thread for this already -- meaning, I don't think, I know so, its right at the top of the board and you do too, becuase you said so, but decided that you are such a unique and beautiful snowflake that surely what you had to say was just too good to fit into the countless threads there have already been on this isusue.

...but hell, thanks for starting another one... meaning thanks for assuming that what you had to say was so special that it warrented further clutting up the board when there have already been countless threads, many of which include people making the exact same point you are.

See, that's what we call "an opinion." /nod It's not the inability to read, it is instead the ability to reject the relevance of what's being said.

The bottom line is, I disagree that what you have to say warrants a new thread. And the only reason I'm still harping on this issue, and will for as long as you continue to respond and keep saying I didn't read your post, which is a lie, is because I don't like the FALLACIOUS way of arguing, which is to respond to someone by saying "well if you had actually bothered to read, you would see..." Essnetially, that is nothing more than a ad hominem statement that holds no meaning.

I always read before I post.