master, slave

People like Clifford Heath seem to be able to detect bitterness in lots of places where more objective observers might not be able to find it.

Phil Allison seems to have a similar sort of problem with autism.

This group does seem to contain a remarkably large number of bitter people, and Clifford Heath does seem to be one of them.

If I was a bitter as he seems to think, the NSW branch of the IEEE would have chucked me out years ago. They aren't a particularly irascible group, but I seem to fit in just fine.

No, just observant. I have a lot of time for Bill actually, but his need to constantly put everyone down is simply tiresome. If he stayed on technical and factual material, he could be one of the best contributors here.

It seems to me that you've inferred PERSONAL animosity, while I generally find Bill to be a correct-logical-inference poster. He doesn't make (or approve) unbacked claims, and you're trying to make this into a personal trait called bitterness.

It's not bitterness I see, but pedagogy. Stop thinking 'tiresome', and consider the specific statements uttered (or at least mention them, so that we have a chance to share your insights).

Flinging 'tiresome' or 'bitter' characterizations into the mix, tells us that you put people into boxes with those labels, as a way of being dismissive. That's how age discrimination works, too. J'accuse!

approve) unbacked

rness.

While Bill often posts factual and logic content, his motivation appears to be not so much to promote an open discussion of a topic, but to bait peopl e into a disagreement so he can attempt to lord over them. At some point w hen others have the upper hand factually, he resorts to personal attacks an d petty name calling like those he loves to to point out as doing exactly t hat.

I appreciate the factual content he provides, but the other aspects of his posts are rather annoying. That is when he lowers himself to the level he feels those who he attacks exist.

consider the

that you put

's how

You do know you are in SED, right?

Clifford Heath wrote in news:F%GCF.80489$ snipped-for-privacy@fx36.iad:

This group is better than "All In The Family" episodes... NOT!!!

Grow the f*ck up already people.

Strange idea. I wonder what form this "lording" might take?

Perhaps you could find an example?

If somebody accuses me of being idiotic, I do feel free to point out that is isn't an particularly intelligent response

Not a great sentence. Where did the "exist" come from?

But we do need to improve SED.

Nearly every of his posts is a droning personal insult.

The very first time Sloman replied to one of my posts, he made an incorrect claim and then turned it onto a personal insult.

He was a lot younger then, and he's gotten progressively worse.

Ignore him.

So, Level 1, Level 2?

snipped-for-privacy@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:

Yeah, johnny is a real man. Let him mentor you.

John Larkin experiences the absence of flattery directed at him as "a droning personal insult". He hates plowing through text that doesn't feed his vanity at frequent intervals.

Cite.

It has to be earlier than 2000 (when I turned 58). Google search doesn't show anything earlier than the 20th December 2001.

John Larkin had silly ideas about anthropogenic global warming even back then, so his idea of what might constitute an "incorrect claim" isn't to be relied on.

That would suit John. He could post his silly ideas without having to cope with informed criticism.

John Larkin keeps on making the same incorrect claims, and treats the corrections as personal insults.

I used to give John Larkin the benefit of the doubt a lot more than I do now.

What I could initially ignore as mere mis-information has now been repeated so often that it looks like much more indoctrinated proselytising, so it now gets the reaction it deserves.

That would suit John Larkin - he may not get paid for the propaganda he pumps out, but he's presumably being rewarded with the flattery he craves.

"MAIN" and "AUX" is also used (as in aircraft engines) but the clarity of aux following main is missing.

piglet

"Principal" and "derived"?

piglet wrote in news:qriulk$93i$ snipped-for-privacy@dont-email.me:

Main and Redundant.

They delayed aid for review, then delivered it. Perfectly reasonable.

By contrast, the previous administration offered Putin 'more flexibility', denied military aid entirely, and stood idle while Putin invaded Ukraine.

The constitution says the president has to see the laws be faithfully executed -- he's obliged to pursue that.

It seems plain the former vice president laundered a $3 million bribe through his family, in exchange for favorable U.S. policy.

Then, Biden boasts he got the Ukrainian Prosecutor General, hot on Biden's trail, fired, after Biden threatened (according to Biden) to withhold $1 billion in U.S. aid.

The Democrats risk exposure in their several plots against the president. For example, Adam Schiff's conspiring with co-plotter activist / leaker / spy / mole / "whistleblower" Eric Ciaramella, who in turn was the mysterious "Charley" mentioned in FBI plotters Strzok & Page's texts, etc.

W.r.t. to John's dilemma, my vote's for "Master and Slave"; I see no reason to change our language to suit p.c. fashion.

But a second choice would be "Reference" and "Slave" or "Follower". (Or "Congress" and "citizen" :-)

Cheers, James Arthur

The 'for review' excuse is lame, and not legal. There IS a review required, and it was completed months before the eventual aid delivery.

If 'outrageous' is a word outside your vocabulary, picking 'reasonable' to replace it is an odd word choice.

Faith to the duties of a president does NOT willfully endanger innocent citizens who go abroad. The Donald was taking shots at a blameless citizen of OUR country, and that's a violation of his oath of office.

Bald-faced lie, 'no evidence' is another, better, way to express how 'plain' that claim is.

Are you an incel?

a man told me one time he doesn't like women in the workplace, they cause "too much drama."

lol

Exactly. One advantage of having two main parties is they they will investigate one another. Keeps the corruption down a bit.

If the Bidens might have used the veep's position for profit, which sure looks likely, what's wrong with investigating? He's not immune from the law just because he might run for president some day.

"No evidence" will always be true if fat cats are never allowed to be investigated.

The dems are shrieking about this because the Bidens probably did profiteer. If they didn't, there's nothing to be afraid of discovering.

A Senate impeachment trial could be great fun. I wonder if the Dems really want one now. DT does!