Widlar's Early Treatise on Semiconductors

The mark of the lefty is its disregard for everyone else. You're the text book example of a narcissistic asshole.

...and the lies.

Note that I've gone to trouble of snipping out every last one of the extra lines that Google Groups insists on inserting into the stuff you post from there.

That's not not "disregarding everyone else".

That was satirical - clearly not intended to be read literally. But krw isn't up to detecting that kind of subtlety, as we've notice before - as in "when Obama was born - in Uganda". Birthers all "know" that he was born in Kenya ...

...and have always done it for *every* post. Riiiight.

Now, start trimming your line length, putz.

No, it was a lie. ...which is your normal mode.

Pretty much. You'd have to look hard to find a counter-example, and that kind of effort is quite beyond you.

I do do that for DecadentLinuxNumeroUno, who doesn't seem to be able afford a modern usenet viewer either. Going to that kind of trouble for you would probably being excessive considerate.

If you had a brain in your head you'd know that a lie is an intentionally false statement, intended to deceive. False statements used ironically aren't intended to deceive, so they aren't lies.

You think that any statement that you disagree with is false - which is often wrong - and intended to deceive - which isn't true if the statements embodies an honest misapprehension. You do go in for a lot of honest misapprehensions, but we don't accuse you of lying

- merely of being dim and ill-informed.

You're lying again, Slowman.

You're lying again, Slowman.

You're lying, again.

You *are* a pathological liar.

You're a lifeless p.o.s. with nothing to say. Your replies are the same old repetitive, tedious, unimaginative and impertinent drivel. Just go TF away , you're useless and have NOTHING to contribute to the ng. Take the equally brain damaged "JohnS" and "JW" with you when you leave, two more space tak ers.

Not true. You haven't found a counter-example - as I predicted - and my guess is that you didn't even try.

You clearly enjoy making that claim, but you aren't capable of making the kind of effort which would make the claim remotely plausible.

That was actually something that Rickman posted. Your response exposed you as the half-wit you are, with more than usual clarity.

No. Just explaining what the words you use are normally understood to mean.

Sadly for your reputation, I'm not. You've just exposed yourself - not for the first time - as a half-wit.

Yet you hang on every word, Blobbs. What a loser!

Sorry, Slowman, I'm going to stoop down to your level and go through your crap on GG. the fact is that you're lying. You haven't trimmed the blank spaces out of *every* post.

No, it's just a fact of life. Liars lie. It's who they are.

You can't even read. Nothing new.

You're explaining nothing. You're lying.

Reputation? Someone saying the truth is terrible, for a lefty, sure.

but

guess is that you didn't even try.

I didn't claim that I had. If you looked hard enough you probably could fin d something where I'd missed one,but you aren't going to rise to my level and even try to validate your claim that I'm a "narcissist leftist who disrega rds everyone else".

e kind of effort which would make the claim remotely plausible.

It may be a tautalogical fact of life, but in reality "all Cretans are liar s" isn't a particularly useful piece of information, because even liars can 't be relied to lie all the time.

ou as the half-wit you are, with more than usual clarity.

You can't comprehend.

an.

I'm explaining nothing to you, because you understand very little. Anybody else silly enough to pay attention to this tedious nit-picking will probabl y do better.

is

or the first time - as a half-wit.

And that someone is you? You can't tell the difference between truth and li es, and congratulate yourself for your heroic championing of the truth when what in fact you are doing is yelling "liar" with as little discriminatio n as five-year old who has recognised that it's a term of abuse, without qu ite understanding what constitutes a lie.

Five-year-olds grow up. There's less hope for you.

Then you admit that your demand for a counterexample would be a trivial exercise for anyone wanting to stoop to your level.

It's not useful because, as is your norm, it's a lie. ...but you don't understand simple English, either.

No, you're illiterate. Again, nothing new.

How would you know? You're still living off others' teat.

find

and > >even try to validate your claim that I'm a "narcissist leftist who

Why would I admit anything of the sort? Digging through a pile of old posts isn't an trivial exercise, and I can't imagine that anybody in their right mind would take it on. Your problem is that you've made a - silly - claim that would take that kind of stoop labour to valididate and you now are try ing weasel out out of the work while persisting in the claim.

le

the kind of effort which would make the claim remotely plausible.

iars" isn't a particularly useful piece of information, because even liars can't be relied to lie all the time.

You certainly don't but - as usual - your claim that I don't needs to be va lidated by an example.

When I made the point that you didn't recognise satire I quoted rickman's l ine about Obama being recognisable as a communist as soon as he was born in Uganda, which you completely failed to recognise as comically intended.

You haven't a clue about how you might validate your - absurd - claim that I don't understand simple Engish, and you'll weasel out in your usual way.

If I were illiterate, I wouldn't be able to read your pearls of wisdom, or type out meaningful reactions to them.

You really do need to work out what polysyllabic words actually mean before you start slinging them around as if they were meaningless insults.

nts

mean.

I'm obviously not explaining anything to you - not because my explanations are deceitful, but because your comprehension leaves quite a lot to be desi red.

You really ought to work out the difference between "lies" and stuff you ca n't actually follow.

dy else silly enough to pay attention to this tedious nit-picking will prob ably do better.

if

t for the first time - as a half-wit.

lies, and congratulate yourself for your heroic championing of the truth w hen what in fact you are doing is yelling "liar" with as little discrimina tion as five-year old who has recognised that it's a term of abuse, without quite understanding what constitutes a lie.

That is a lie, and you know that it's a lie. As I've mentioned before, I'm now living off the UK old age pension - which is "National Insurance" that I paid for over 22 years of working in the UK and bought more of to cover t he years I was working in the Netherlands, as well as a UK occupational pen sion of about the same size. There is also Dutch pension money, but less of it.

old repetitive, tedious, unimaginative and impertinent drivel. Just go TF a way, you're useless and have NOTHING to contribute to the ng. Take the equa lly brain damaged "JohnS" and "JW" with you when you leave, two more space takers.

Nah- your simple minded replies are unoriginal hackneyed cliches that say a bsolutely nothing. You're the typical idle internet luser looking for atten tion.

You're lying again, Blobbs. You *must* read my every word. You can't help yourself and prove it constantly. What a stinkin' loser!

You're as dumb a Blobbs.

You aren't worth thought, Slowman. ...aren't worth reading but one in ten words, either. Too boring!

Validate. All anyone has to do is read your drivel. After a day, they can skip 90% of the words. Hell, skip 'em all. You never have anything worth saying and are a mean and cranky asshole saying it.

You *can't*. That's the point, idiot!

e:

validated by an example.

Flattery will get you nowhere.

s line about Obama being recognisable as a communist as soon as he was born in Uganda, which you completely failed to recognise as comically intended.

Not exactly the most entertaining or original abuse we've seen, and it does n't answer the point I made.

at I don't understand simple Engish, and you'll weasel out in your usual wa y.

You skip them, because you don't understand most of them. Your incapacity d oesn't make you an influential literary critic. Quite the reverse.

or type out meaningful reactions to them.

Illiteracy doesn't involve understanding text in the way the author would l ike it to be understood. It's a rather narrower concept, which you clearly haven't grasped.

An illiterate doesn't recognise a string of alphabetic characters as a word , and can't put alphabetic characters together on a piece of paper or a com puter screen to create meaningful words.

you may think that you can appeal to the second, third or forth alternative meanings, but nobody is going to believe that you could manage that kind o f complicated inference. To you "illiterate" is a term of abuse, like "liar " and you don't actually understand what the words mean to anybody with any kind of education.

KRW: go and stand in that corner. Sloman: go and stand in the other corner. NOW! And stop talking to each other, or you'll get a detention.

Sadly, this is usenet, not a school-room. You can ask us to behave like we had some sense, but you don't actually have the authority to persuade us to be reasonable.