Two More Infants Killed After Adults Leave Them in Hot Car

Murderous Speeding Drunken Distracted Driver (Hector Goldstein) wrote:
> nimue wrote:
>> Murderous Speeding Drunken Distracted Driver (Hector Goldstein)
>> wrote:
>>> nimue wrote:
>>> My curriculum did not require literature, fortunately, or if it did,
>>> it was only a semester's worth.
>>
>> It's one of the greatest works of English literature AND it is
>> present in current pop culture. People who don't have half your
>> claimed brains know what P&P is.
>
> What part of "I don't care for literature" are you having difficulty
> understanding?

I know you don't. You just can't seem to leave it at that. You need to
tell me about all the things you are great at to make up for it.
>
>>>
>>>>> That book must be pretty damned important!
>>>>
>>>> All her books are. P&P is considered to be her best.
>>>
>>> And yet I've managed to survive without that. Can't be too
>>> important.
>>
>> By that reasoning, Sobel filters can't be too important (unless, of
>> course, YOUR opinion is the only one that matters.
>
> They aren't important. But they are heavily utilized in culture.
>
> <snip>
>>>
>>> Good. Now have you used that book to create jobs?
>>
>> Any book in my hand represents 1000s of jobs, including mine.
>
> Good; I'm glad I could help you out. I've performed consulting
> services for a few publishers.

Well, aren't you just the savior of the universe. I've worked in
publishing, btw. I never met anyone as full of his own importance as you.
This whole thing started because of your arrogance.
>
>>> The techniques I
>>> from the books I've read have created employment, at above our
>>> state's average wage, for a number of people.
>>
>> Yay for you. So what? My point was that you have no knowledge of
>> literature. Saying you've made jobs won't change that.
>
> Really? I don't believe I ever said I claimed to have any knowledge of
> it.

I never said you did.

>I wrote that I read some when I was younger, but I preferred
> reading non-fiction.
>
> <snip>
>>>
>>> Then you have done a most excellent job, IMO. Congrats!
>>
>> Well, then. Thank you.
>
> No problem.
>
>>> I didn't ask how many people you have educated; I asked how many
>>> jobs you've provided.
>>
>> I'm a teacher. Trust me, educating our kids is every bit as
>> important as creating jobs.
>
> I concur. Keep up the good work.

Thank you again.
>
> <snip>
>
>>>> Oh, my god! WHAT is your problem? How insecure are YOU? Yay for
>>>> you -- you've done a ton. However, I am quite sure you haven't
>>>> given as much joy to people -- or sparked as much interest -- as
>>>> good old Jane has.
>>>
>>> You know what? I haven't even tried.
>>
>> Here we go again -- you are absolutely convinced you would be great
>> at whatever you wanted to do.
>
> Exactly.

So, you think you could be as popular and beloved as Jane Austen if you only
tried -- never mind that you don't like fiction and you don't like
literature and that thousands of writers who do have tried and failed.
Okay.
>
> I'm not interested in bringing in giving as much joy to people as gold
> old Jane is. I'm sorry. I don't have the talent, skill set, or
> appreciation required for the subject to produce what Jane is capable
> of producing.

Thank god you've admitted it!

>I'm really wondering how this can be such a difficult
> concept for you to grasp.

Well when I write
<<However, I am quite sure you haven't given as much joy to people -- or
sparked as much interest -- as good old Jane has.>>

and you respond with

<<You know what? I haven't even tried>>

it sure looks like you think you <<have the talent, skill set, [and]
appreciation required for the subject to produce what Jane is capable of
producing. >>


>
> That being said, though, I've done what I could to help people like
> Jane reach her audience. I've served as a consultant on the
> publication of a number of novels. The role I served was as much
> effort as I could and would put into the field of literature, and I
> enjoyed the tasks, and got paid reasonably well for very little
> effort. Very little, fairly specialized effort for which I had no
> training, but was able to pick up on the fly to meet the publisher's
> needs. So, yeah, in a sense literature has brought me joy, because I
> had fun on the production side of things. As for the content, though,
> it's merely information to be presented for rendering to media as far
> as I am concerned. First novel took about 30 minutes as I had to learn
> what needed to be done and develop an approach; after that it was
> about 5 minutes a pop. That's about all the time I cared to spend with
> them, even though I had them before the first drop of ink hit the
> paper. That literature brought me a great deal of joy.
>
>>> But I'll bet I've been directly responsible for putting more food on
>>> people's table than you have.
>>
>> That's nice for you. That doesn't change the fact that you don't
>> know English lit. Are you so freaked out about not knowing
>> something that you have to prove your worth to me?
>
> I never claimed to know english lit. I've tried to convey that it's
> absolutely valueless to me. I'm not bothered in the least by not
> knowing anything about it. I'm sorry you've misread that. Never
> claimed to be interested in it, either.
>
> I find joy in manipulating information. To me, literature is merely
> something I would stick in something called a "text" field. I enjoy,
> if given the opportunity, to be involved in production
>
>>> I'd also be willing to bet that the efforts performed by the people
>>> who filled those jobs is in AT LEAST one location in your house, and
>>> perhaps hundreds. So, by extension, my work is in your house. Is any
>>> of yours in mine?
>>
>> I doubt it. So what? You still don't know the Western canon and my
>> work is
>
> That's your ignorance, not mine.

How is that my ignorance? Your lack of knowledge is your own ignorance.

> I never claimed to be an expert on
> the canon.
>
>> still important -- very important. Who educated all those people so
>> that they would be able to fill those jobs?
>
> Dunno, but the only time I saw 'em reading lit was while they weren't
> doing their jobs.

If they couldn't read lit, they couldn't do their jobs.
>
> By the way, I know for a fact literature wasn't a requirement for
> their jobs. Nothing taught in schools besides basic english was
> required for the job. Creative ability and the ability to discern what
> was visually appealing.

Do they have to interpret...anything?

>Ironically, for those reason, I could not have
> performed the jobs I was involved in creating. A required
> characteristic is missing, and it's linked to the same characteristic
> required to enjoy lit.
>
>>>> Clearly you care what I think. Why else are you dragging out long,
>>>> supposedly impressive, descriptions of the things you have done?
>>>
>>> I'm an ass hole, and I'm bored at present. :-)
>>
>> I can understand that.
>
> Hey, progress! Finally you understand something.

I understand that you are full of yourself.
>
> <snip>
>>>>> IMO, lit's a waste of time.
>>>>
>>>> I don't agree. I would say that the schools, universities,
>>>> libraries, bookstores, magazines, newspapers, publishing companies,
>>>> and the television and film industries (WOW! That's a lot of
>>>> JOBS!), to name just a few, don't agree with you, either.
>>>
>>> ROTFLMAO. You just don't get it.
>>
>> What don't I get?
>
> THAT I HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO INTEREST WHATSOEVER IN LITERATURE. AS A
> RESULT, I'M NOT GOING TO KNOW A THING ABOUT IT, BECAUSE I HONESTLY
> JUST DO NOT CARE ABOUT THE SUBJECT.

Yeah. I get that. Saying << I don't agree. I would say that the schools,
universities, libraries, bookstores, magazines, newspapers, publishing
companies, and the television and film industries (WOW! That's a lot of
JOBS!), to name just a few, don't agree with you, either>> would seem to be
a confirmation of the fact that I "get it."
>
> To me, there are *much* more interesting things in life. I prefer to
> "expand my mind", if you will, by solving puzzles. It brings me
> tremendous joy.
>
>>> Without people like myself, you wouldn't have televisions,
>>> magazines, newspapers, or film. The only way you would be able to
>>> share your precious fiction would be by sitting around the camp
>>> fire in the cave grunting the story to your fellow neanderthals, or
>>> by passing hand-written scrolls around.
>>
>> Yeah -- I know that. I never said otherwise. Why do you think I did?
>> You're the one saying that "lit's a waste of time." I am not
>> knocking what you do. I don't know anything about it -- I can admit
>> that. You should learn to.
>>>
>>> Where would your career be without the printing press?
>>
>> What is your point? I never knocked technology -- or anything. YOU
>> knocked literature because you were embarrassed that you were
>> unfamiliar with it.
>
> I've never been embarrassed that I am unfamiliar with lit.

Sure you are. Your behavior in this thread shows it.

>I am
> unfamiliar with it because I don't care about it. If I cared about it,
> I would be very knowledgable on the subject. I find there's far more
> interesting things in life than literature. I know little about it,
> and have absolutely no desire to learn any more about it than I
> already know. I'm more interested in the technical aspects of it's
> production, which I've found most intriguing in the past. I prefer to
> spend my time solving puzzles; in the past those puzzles have included
> "how do we get this novel to press?"
>
> My personal belief, and I know this is going to be totally beyond your
> comprehension,

No, you don't know that.

>is that there's far more joy in interactively solving
> such problems as there is in passively enjoying the benefits of
> fiction and the other cultural productions I've been involved in.

Reading a book is an interactive experience. There are many problems to be
solved and explored in books -- ask any English prof.
>
>>> Your type needs my type far more than my type needs yours. For
>>> without my type, literature would not exist no matter how much you
>>> wanted it too. Remember that the next time you crack open a volume.
>>
>> Uh, hello. Calm the **** down. I'm not attacking "your type."
>
> It's been a personal attack since your first post, as I am "my type".

No.
>
>>>>> I'm glad you think otherwise. I also
>>>>> think art is a waste of time, but that doesn't mean I haven't
>>>>> created jobs for a number of artists.
>>>>
>>>> Well, aren't you special? Have you created as many jobs as the
>>>> industries I mentioned above?
>>>
>>> Uh, dude, I've played rolls in more than one of the industries
>>> you've listed.
>>
>> Roles, honey. And have you created as many jobs as those
>> industries? Just a question you didn't answer. I don't care what
>> you've done in all those different industries. Your value in
>> different arenas may be real, but you still don't know English lit
>> and apparently can't bear being told that you don't know something.
>
> Wow, how the hell do you come up with this? What gives you the idea
> that I give a crap about lit?

I don't think you do. I think you were just embarrassed by the mistake you
made.

>Hey, here's a news flash for ya: I don't
> give a **** about gardening, either. I'm not really feeling too warm
> and fuzzy about golf, baseball, basketball, hockey, football, or
> soccer, either. Anything involving being the center of attention in
> front of a large group of people is out of the question as well which
> would be a major road block were I ever to remotely consider teaching.
>
> Just for the record: I know nothing about the subjects listed in the
> above paragraph. I have no doubt I would be a complete and utter
> failure in attempting to perform any of those tasks. I have no
> interest in even attempting to do anything, including, but not limited
> to, learning, studying, practicing, or really even discussing any of
> them.
>
> Although given the present company, teaching is an acceptable subject,
> as I am appreciative of the role you perform, and I can tell you're
> passionate about your subject.
>
> Again I offer my praise for your role, even though I have some
> personal disagreements with you. :-)

Well, that, sir, is gracious. Get rid of some of your nasty little insults
and you wouldn't be half bad.

--
nimue

"Let your freak-flag fly, and if someone doesn't get you, move on."
Drew Barrymore

nimue wrote:
>Murderous Speeding Drunken Distracted Driver (Hector Goldstein) wrote:
>> nimue wrote:
>>> Murderous Speeding Drunken Distracted Driver (Hector Goldstein)
>>> wrote:
>>>> nimue wrote:
>>>> My curriculum did not require literature, fortunately, or if it did,
>>>> it was only a semester's worth.
>>>
>>> It's one of the greatest works of English literature AND it is
>>> present in current pop culture. People who don't have half your
>>> claimed brains know what P&P is.
>>
>> What part of "I don't care for literature" are you having difficulty
>> understanding?
>
>I know you don't. You just can't seem to leave it at that. You need to
>tell me about all the things you are great at to make up for it.

Wow, your inability to comprehend what I'm writing escapes me. Now I
am getting a clearer picture to why the American educational system is
graduating so many morons incapable of competing on a global level. I
rescind my prior thanks, and pray you weren't involved in my son's
education.

<snip>
>> Good; I'm glad I could help you out. I've performed consulting
>> services for a few publishers.
>
>Well, aren't you just the savior of the universe. I've worked in
>publishing, btw. I never met anyone as full of his own importance as you.
>This whole thing started because of your arrogance.

No, this whole thing started, and is perpetuated by your ignorance and
inability to comprehend the trivial. I'm sorry that's beyond your
ability to reason, but that's not my problem.

>>>> The techniques I
>>>> from the books I've read have created employment, at above our
>>>> state's average wage, for a number of people.
>>>
>>> Yay for you. So what? My point was that you have no knowledge of
>>> literature. Saying you've made jobs won't change that.
>>
>> Really? I don't believe I ever said I claimed to have any knowledge of
>> it.
>
>I never said you did.

Read what I replied to; it's in start contrast to what you just wrote!
Can't you maintain consistency with your own statements? God I feel
sorry for the American student.

>>I wrote that I read some when I was younger, but I preferred
>> reading non-fiction.
>>
>> <snip>
>>>>
>>>> Then you have done a most excellent job, IMO. Congrats!
>>>
>>> Well, then. Thank you.
>>
>> No problem.
>>
>>>> I didn't ask how many people you have educated; I asked how many
>>>> jobs you've provided.
>>>
>>> I'm a teacher. Trust me, educating our kids is every bit as
>>> important as creating jobs.
>>
>> I concur. Keep up the good work.
>
>Thank you again.

I've changed my opinion, obviously.

>> <snip>
>>
>>>>> Oh, my god! WHAT is your problem? How insecure are YOU? Yay for
>>>>> you -- you've done a ton. However, I am quite sure you haven't
>>>>> given as much joy to people -- or sparked as much interest -- as
>>>>> good old Jane has.
>>>>
>>>> You know what? I haven't even tried.
>>>
>>> Here we go again -- you are absolutely convinced you would be great
>>> at whatever you wanted to do.
>>
>> Exactly.
>
>So, you think you could be as popular and beloved as Jane Austen if you only
>tried -- never mind that you don't like fiction and you don't like
>literature and that thousands of writers who do have tried and failed.
>Okay.

That's not what I wrote. Sorry you are incapable of comprehending
that.

>> I'm not interested in bringing in giving as much joy to people as gold
>> old Jane is. I'm sorry. I don't have the talent, skill set, or
>> appreciation required for the subject to produce what Jane is capable
>> of producing.
>
>Thank god you've admitted it!

I've *NEVER* attempted to deny it, moron.

>>I'm really wondering how this can be such a difficult
>> concept for you to grasp.
>
>Well when I write
><<However, I am quite sure you haven't given as much joy to people -- or
>sparked as much interest -- as good old Jane has.>>
>
>and you respond with
>
><<You know what? I haven't even tried>>
>
>it sure looks like you think you <<have the talent, skill set, [and]
>appreciation required for the subject to produce what Jane is capable of
>producing. >>

No it doesn't, unless you have a reasonably serious reading
comprehension issues. OMFG.

I don't give a crap about what Jane is capable of producing, other
than the part it plays in the systems I design and produce. I've never
indicated otherwise, and yet you insist otherwise.

>> That being said, though, I've done what I could to help people like
>> Jane reach her audience. I've served as a consultant on the
>> publication of a number of novels. The role I served was as much
>> effort as I could and would put into the field of literature, and I
>> enjoyed the tasks, and got paid reasonably well for very little
>> effort. Very little, fairly specialized effort for which I had no
>> training, but was able to pick up on the fly to meet the publisher's
>> needs. So, yeah, in a sense literature has brought me joy, because I
>> had fun on the production side of things. As for the content, though,
>> it's merely information to be presented for rendering to media as far
>> as I am concerned. First novel took about 30 minutes as I had to learn
>> what needed to be done and develop an approach; after that it was
>> about 5 minutes a pop. That's about all the time I cared to spend with
>> them, even though I had them before the first drop of ink hit the
>> paper. That literature brought me a great deal of joy.
>>
>>>> But I'll bet I've been directly responsible for putting more food on
>>>> people's table than you have.
>>>
>>> That's nice for you. That doesn't change the fact that you don't
>>> know English lit. Are you so freaked out about not knowing
>>> something that you have to prove your worth to me?
>>
>> I never claimed to know english lit. I've tried to convey that it's
>> absolutely valueless to me. I'm not bothered in the least by not
>> knowing anything about it. I'm sorry you've misread that. Never
>> claimed to be interested in it, either.
>>
>> I find joy in manipulating information. To me, literature is merely
>> something I would stick in something called a "text" field. I enjoy,
>> if given the opportunity, to be involved in production
>>
>>>> I'd also be willing to bet that the efforts performed by the people
>>>> who filled those jobs is in AT LEAST one location in your house, and
>>>> perhaps hundreds. So, by extension, my work is in your house. Is any
>>>> of yours in mine?
>>>
>>> I doubt it. So what? You still don't know the Western canon and my
>>> work is
>>
>> That's your ignorance, not mine.
>
>How is that my ignorance? Your lack of knowledge is your own ignorance.

Thanks again; this thread gets more entertaining with each of your
posts. :-)

>> I never claimed to be an expert on
>> the canon.
>>
>>> still important -- very important. Who educated all those people so
>>> that they would be able to fill those jobs?
>>
>> Dunno, but the only time I saw 'em reading lit was while they weren't
>> doing their jobs.
>
>If they couldn't read lit, they couldn't do their jobs.

ROTFLMAO.

>> By the way, I know for a fact literature wasn't a requirement for
>> their jobs. Nothing taught in schools besides basic english was
>> required for the job. Creative ability and the ability to discern what
>> was visually appealing.
>
>Do they have to interpret...anything?

Not really.

>>Ironically, for those reason, I could not have
>> performed the jobs I was involved in creating. A required
>> characteristic is missing, and it's linked to the same characteristic
>> required to enjoy lit.
>>
>>>>> Clearly you care what I think. Why else are you dragging out long,
>>>>> supposedly impressive, descriptions of the things you have done?
>>>>
>>>> I'm an ass hole, and I'm bored at present. :-)
>>>
>>> I can understand that.
>>
>> Hey, progress! Finally you understand something.
>
>I understand that you are full of yourself.

It's obvious your understanding is severely lacking.

>> <snip>
>>>>>> IMO, lit's a waste of time.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't agree. I would say that the schools, universities,
>>>>> libraries, bookstores, magazines, newspapers, publishing companies,
>>>>> and the television and film industries (WOW! That's a lot of
>>>>> JOBS!), to name just a few, don't agree with you, either.
>>>>
>>>> ROTFLMAO. You just don't get it.
>>>
>>> What don't I get?
>>
>> THAT I HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO INTEREST WHATSOEVER IN LITERATURE. AS A
>> RESULT, I'M NOT GOING TO KNOW A THING ABOUT IT, BECAUSE I HONESTLY
>> JUST DO NOT CARE ABOUT THE SUBJECT.
>
>Yeah. I get that. Saying << I don't agree. I would say that the schools,
>universities, libraries, bookstores, magazines, newspapers, publishing
>companies, and the television and film industries (WOW! That's a lot of
>JOBS!), to name just a few, don't agree with you, either>> would seem to be
>a confirmation of the fact that I "get it."

There may be hope for you yet.

>> To me, there are *much* more interesting things in life. I prefer to
>> "expand my mind", if you will, by solving puzzles. It brings me
>> tremendous joy.
>>
>>>> Without people like myself, you wouldn't have televisions,
>>>> magazines, newspapers, or film. The only way you would be able to
>>>> share your precious fiction would be by sitting around the camp
>>>> fire in the cave grunting the story to your fellow neanderthals, or
>>>> by passing hand-written scrolls around.
>>>
>>> Yeah -- I know that. I never said otherwise. Why do you think I did?
>>> You're the one saying that "lit's a waste of time." I am not
>>> knocking what you do. I don't know anything about it -- I can admit
>>> that. You should learn to.
>>>>
>>>> Where would your career be without the printing press?
>>>
>>> What is your point? I never knocked technology -- or anything. YOU
>>> knocked literature because you were embarrassed that you were
>>> unfamiliar with it.
>>
>> I've never been embarrassed that I am unfamiliar with lit.
>
>Sure you are. Your behavior in this thread shows it.

No it doesn't. What it demonstrates is that you are incapable of
understanding the concept of apathy. That's your failing, not mine,
and it's also not my problem. It is, however, your student's problem.
Fortunately for me, I get paid regardless of whether my code is in
production in China, Korea, Israel, Chile, Venezuela, Germany, France,
England, or France.

By the way, how is western lit going to help me when I'm working with
non-western civ?

>>I am
>> unfamiliar with it because I don't care about it. If I cared about it,
>> I would be very knowledgable on the subject. I find there's far more
>> interesting things in life than literature. I know little about it,
>> and have absolutely no desire to learn any more about it than I
>> already know. I'm more interested in the technical aspects of it's
>> production, which I've found most intriguing in the past. I prefer to
>> spend my time solving puzzles; in the past those puzzles have included
>> "how do we get this novel to press?"
>>
>> My personal belief, and I know this is going to be totally beyond your
>> comprehension,
>
>No, you don't know that.

Yes, I do. Your posting history is indicative of that.

>>is that there's far more joy in interactively solving
>> such problems as there is in passively enjoying the benefits of
>> fiction and the other cultural productions I've been involved in.
>
>Reading a book is an interactive experience. There are many problems to be
>solved and explored in books -- ask any English prof.

Look up "apathy." Get back to me.

>>>> Your type needs my type far more than my type needs yours. For
>>>> without my type, literature would not exist no matter how much you
>>>> wanted it too. Remember that the next time you crack open a volume.
>>>
>>> Uh, hello. Calm the **** down. I'm not attacking "your type."
>>
>> It's been a personal attack since your first post, as I am "my type".
>
>No.

Denial doesn't change the fact.

>>>>>> I'm glad you think otherwise. I also
>>>>>> think art is a waste of time, but that doesn't mean I haven't
>>>>>> created jobs for a number of artists.
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, aren't you special? Have you created as many jobs as the
>>>>> industries I mentioned above?
>>>>
>>>> Uh, dude, I've played rolls in more than one of the industries
>>>> you've listed.
>>>
>>> Roles, honey. And have you created as many jobs as those
>>> industries? Just a question you didn't answer. I don't care what
>>> you've done in all those different industries. Your value in
>>> different arenas may be real, but you still don't know English lit
>>> and apparently can't bear being told that you don't know something.
>>
>> Wow, how the hell do you come up with this? What gives you the idea
>> that I give a crap about lit?
>
>I don't think you do. I think you were just embarrassed by the mistake you
>made.

Your reading comprehension failure is my mistake? Rich.

>>Hey, here's a news flash for ya: I don't
>> give a **** about gardening, either. I'm not really feeling too warm
>> and fuzzy about golf, baseball, basketball, hockey, football, or
>> soccer, either. Anything involving being the center of attention in
>> front of a large group of people is out of the question as well which
>> would be a major road block were I ever to remotely consider teaching.
>>
>> Just for the record: I know nothing about the subjects listed in the
>> above paragraph. I have no doubt I would be a complete and utter
>> failure in attempting to perform any of those tasks. I have no
>> interest in even attempting to do anything, including, but not limited
>> to, learning, studying, practicing, or really even discussing any of
>> them.
>>
>> Although given the present company, teaching is an acceptable subject,
>> as I am appreciative of the role you perform, and I can tell you're
>> passionate about your subject.
>>
>> Again I offer my praise for your role, even though I have some
>> personal disagreements with you. :-)
>
>Well, that, sir, is gracious. Get rid of some of your nasty little insults
>and you wouldn't be half bad.

I've obviously changed my opinion of the quality of work you're
capable of performing. Thank God I didn't go through your classroom;
you've got to be one of the most ignorant instructors I've ever
encountered. What state do you teach in?


--

We're all here
because we're not all there.

"Murderous Speeding Drunken Distracted Driver (Hector Goldstein)"
> wrote in message
...
> nimue wrote:
>>Murderous Speeding Drunken Distracted Driver (Hector Goldstein)
>>wrote:
>>> nimue wrote:
>>>> Murderous Speeding Drunken Distracted Driver (Hector Goldstein)
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> nimue wrote:
>>>>> My curriculum did not require literature, fortunately, or if it
>>>>> did,
>>>>> it was only a semester's worth.
>>>>
>>>> It's one of the greatest works of English literature AND it is
>>>> present in current pop culture. People who don't have half your
>>>> claimed brains know what P&P is.
>>>
>>> What part of "I don't care for literature" are you having
>>> difficulty
>>> understanding?
>>
>>I know you don't. You just can't seem to leave it at that. You
>>need to
>>tell me about all the things you are great at to make up for it.
>
> Wow, your inability to comprehend what I'm writing escapes me. Now I
> am getting a clearer picture to why the American educational system
> is
> graduating so many morons incapable of competing on a global level.
> I
> rescind my prior thanks, and pray you weren't involved in my son's
> education.
>
> <snip>
>>> Good; I'm glad I could help you out. I've performed consulting
>>> services for a few publishers.
>>
>>Well, aren't you just the savior of the universe. I've worked in
>>publishing, btw. I never met anyone as full of his own importance
>>as you.
>>This whole thing started because of your arrogance.
>
> No, this whole thing started, and is perpetuated by your ignorance
> and
> inability to comprehend the trivial. I'm sorry that's beyond your
> ability to reason, but that's not my problem.
>
>>>>> The techniques I
>>>>> from the books I've read have created employment, at above our
>>>>> state's average wage, for a number of people.
>>>>
>>>> Yay for you. So what? My point was that you have no knowledge
>>>> of
>>>> literature. Saying you've made jobs won't change that.
>>>
>>> Really? I don't believe I ever said I claimed to have any
>>> knowledge of
>>> it.
>>
>>I never said you did.
>
> Read what I replied to; it's in start contrast to what you just
> wrote!
> Can't you maintain consistency with your own statements? God I feel
> sorry for the American student.
>
>>>I wrote that I read some when I was younger, but I preferred
>>> reading non-fiction.
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>>>
>>>>> Then you have done a most excellent job, IMO. Congrats!
>>>>
>>>> Well, then. Thank you.
>>>
>>> No problem.
>>>
>>>>> I didn't ask how many people you have educated; I asked how many
>>>>> jobs you've provided.
>>>>
>>>> I'm a teacher. Trust me, educating our kids is every bit as
>>>> important as creating jobs.
>>>
>>> I concur. Keep up the good work.
>>
>>Thank you again.
>
> I've changed my opinion, obviously.
>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>>>> Oh, my god! WHAT is your problem? How insecure are YOU? Yay
>>>>>> for
>>>>>> you -- you've done a ton. However, I am quite sure you haven't
>>>>>> given as much joy to people -- or sparked as much interest --
>>>>>> as
>>>>>> good old Jane has.
>>>>>
>>>>> You know what? I haven't even tried.
>>>>
>>>> Here we go again -- you are absolutely convinced you would be
>>>> great
>>>> at whatever you wanted to do.
>>>
>>> Exactly.
>>
>>So, you think you could be as popular and beloved as Jane Austen if
>>you only
>>tried -- never mind that you don't like fiction and you don't like
>>literature and that thousands of writers who do have tried and
>>failed.
>>Okay.
>
> That's not what I wrote. Sorry you are incapable of comprehending
> that.
>
>>> I'm not interested in bringing in giving as much joy to people as
>>> gold
>>> old Jane is. I'm sorry. I don't have the talent, skill set, or
>>> appreciation required for the subject to produce what Jane is
>>> capable
>>> of producing.
>>
>>Thank god you've admitted it!
>
> I've *NEVER* attempted to deny it, moron.
>
>>>I'm really wondering how this can be such a difficult
>>> concept for you to grasp.
>>
>>Well when I write
>><<However, I am quite sure you haven't given as much joy to
>>people -- or
>>sparked as much interest -- as good old Jane has.>>
>>
>>and you respond with
>>
>><<You know what? I haven't even tried>>
>>
>>it sure looks like you think you <<have the talent, skill set, [and]
>>appreciation required for the subject to produce what Jane is
>>capable of
>>producing. >>
>
> No it doesn't, unless you have a reasonably serious reading
> comprehension issues. OMFG.
>
> I don't give a crap about what Jane is capable of producing, other
> than the part it plays in the systems I design and produce. I've
> never
> indicated otherwise, and yet you insist otherwise.
>
>>> That being said, though, I've done what I could to help people
>>> like
>>> Jane reach her audience. I've served as a consultant on the
>>> publication of a number of novels. The role I served was as much
>>> effort as I could and would put into the field of literature, and
>>> I
>>> enjoyed the tasks, and got paid reasonably well for very little
>>> effort. Very little, fairly specialized effort for which I had no
>>> training, but was able to pick up on the fly to meet the
>>> publisher's
>>> needs. So, yeah, in a sense literature has brought me joy, because
>>> I
>>> had fun on the production side of things. As for the content,
>>> though,
>>> it's merely information to be presented for rendering to media as
>>> far
>>> as I am concerned. First novel took about 30 minutes as I had to
>>> learn
>>> what needed to be done and develop an approach; after that it was
>>> about 5 minutes a pop. That's about all the time I cared to spend
>>> with
>>> them, even though I had them before the first drop of ink hit the
>>> paper. That literature brought me a great deal of joy.
>>>
>>>>> But I'll bet I've been directly responsible for putting more
>>>>> food on
>>>>> people's table than you have.
>>>>
>>>> That's nice for you. That doesn't change the fact that you don't
>>>> know English lit. Are you so freaked out about not knowing
>>>> something that you have to prove your worth to me?
>>>
>>> I never claimed to know english lit. I've tried to convey that
>>> it's
>>> absolutely valueless to me. I'm not bothered in the least by not
>>> knowing anything about it. I'm sorry you've misread that. Never
>>> claimed to be interested in it, either.
>>>
>>> I find joy in manipulating information. To me, literature is
>>> merely
>>> something I would stick in something called a "text" field. I
>>> enjoy,
>>> if given the opportunity, to be involved in production
>>>
>>>>> I'd also be willing to bet that the efforts performed by the
>>>>> people
>>>>> who filled those jobs is in AT LEAST one location in your house,
>>>>> and
>>>>> perhaps hundreds. So, by extension, my work is in your house. Is
>>>>> any
>>>>> of yours in mine?
>>>>
>>>> I doubt it. So what? You still don't know the Western canon and
>>>> my
>>>> work is
>>>
>>> That's your ignorance, not mine.
>>
>>How is that my ignorance? Your lack of knowledge is your own
>>ignorance.
>
> Thanks again; this thread gets more entertaining with each of your
> posts. :-)
>
>>> I never claimed to be an expert on
>>> the canon.
>>>
>>>> still important -- very important. Who educated all those people
>>>> so
>>>> that they would be able to fill those jobs?
>>>
>>> Dunno, but the only time I saw 'em reading lit was while they
>>> weren't
>>> doing their jobs.
>>
>>If they couldn't read lit, they couldn't do their jobs.
>
> ROTFLMAO.
>
>>> By the way, I know for a fact literature wasn't a requirement for
>>> their jobs. Nothing taught in schools besides basic english was
>>> required for the job. Creative ability and the ability to discern
>>> what
>>> was visually appealing.
>>
>>Do they have to interpret...anything?
>
> Not really.
>
>>>Ironically, for those reason, I could not have
>>> performed the jobs I was involved in creating. A required
>>> characteristic is missing, and it's linked to the same
>>> characteristic
>>> required to enjoy lit.
>>>
>>>>>> Clearly you care what I think. Why else are you dragging out
>>>>>> long,
>>>>>> supposedly impressive, descriptions of the things you have
>>>>>> done?
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm an ass hole, and I'm bored at present. :-)
>>>>
>>>> I can understand that.
>>>
>>> Hey, progress! Finally you understand something.
>>
>>I understand that you are full of yourself.
>
> It's obvious your understanding is severely lacking.
>
>>> <snip>
>>>>>>> IMO, lit's a waste of time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't agree. I would say that the schools, universities,
>>>>>> libraries, bookstores, magazines, newspapers, publishing
>>>>>> companies,
>>>>>> and the television and film industries (WOW! That's a lot of
>>>>>> JOBS!), to name just a few, don't agree with you, either.
>>>>>
>>>>> ROTFLMAO. You just don't get it.
>>>>
>>>> What don't I get?
>>>
>>> THAT I HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO INTEREST WHATSOEVER IN LITERATURE. AS A
>>> RESULT, I'M NOT GOING TO KNOW A THING ABOUT IT, BECAUSE I HONESTLY
>>> JUST DO NOT CARE ABOUT THE SUBJECT.
>>
>>Yeah. I get that. Saying << I don't agree. I would say that the
>>schools,
>>universities, libraries, bookstores, magazines, newspapers,
>>publishing
>>companies, and the television and film industries (WOW! That's a
>>lot of
>>JOBS!), to name just a few, don't agree with you, either>> would
>>seem to be
>>a confirmation of the fact that I "get it."
>
> There may be hope for you yet.
>
>>> To me, there are *much* more interesting things in life. I prefer
>>> to
>>> "expand my mind", if you will, by solving puzzles. It brings me
>>> tremendous joy.
>>>
>>>>> Without people like myself, you wouldn't have televisions,
>>>>> magazines, newspapers, or film. The only way you would be able
>>>>> to
>>>>> share your precious fiction would be by sitting around the camp
>>>>> fire in the cave grunting the story to your fellow neanderthals,
>>>>> or
>>>>> by passing hand-written scrolls around.
>>>>
>>>> Yeah -- I know that. I never said otherwise. Why do you think I
>>>> did?
>>>> You're the one saying that "lit's a waste of time." I am not
>>>> knocking what you do. I don't know anything about it -- I can
>>>> admit
>>>> that. You should learn to.
>>>>>
>>>>> Where would your career be without the printing press?
>>>>
>>>> What is your point? I never knocked technology -- or anything.
>>>> YOU
>>>> knocked literature because you were embarrassed that you were
>>>> unfamiliar with it.
>>>
>>> I've never been embarrassed that I am unfamiliar with lit.
>>
>>Sure you are. Your behavior in this thread shows it.
>
> No it doesn't. What it demonstrates is that you are incapable of
> understanding the concept of apathy. That's your failing, not mine,
> and it's also not my problem. It is, however, your student's
> problem.
> Fortunately for me, I get paid regardless of whether my code is in
> production in China, Korea, Israel, Chile, Venezuela, Germany,
> France,
> England, or France.
>
> By the way, how is western lit going to help me when I'm working
> with
> non-western civ?
>
>>>I am
>>> unfamiliar with it because I don't care about it. If I cared about
>>> it,
>>> I would be very knowledgable on the subject. I find there's far
>>> more
>>> interesting things in life than literature. I know little about
>>> it,
>>> and have absolutely no desire to learn any more about it than I
>>> already know. I'm more interested in the technical aspects of it's
>>> production, which I've found most intriguing in the past. I prefer
>>> to
>>> spend my time solving puzzles; in the past those puzzles have
>>> included
>>> "how do we get this novel to press?"
>>>
>>> My personal belief, and I know this is going to be totally beyond
>>> your
>>> comprehension,
>>
>>No, you don't know that.
>
> Yes, I do. Your posting history is indicative of that.
>
>>>is that there's far more joy in interactively solving
>>> such problems as there is in passively enjoying the benefits of
>>> fiction and the other cultural productions I've been involved in.
>>
>>Reading a book is an interactive experience. There are many
>>problems to be
>>solved and explored in books -- ask any English prof.
>
> Look up "apathy." Get back to me.
>
>>>>> Your type needs my type far more than my type needs yours. For
>>>>> without my type, literature would not exist no matter how much
>>>>> you
>>>>> wanted it too. Remember that the next time you crack open a
>>>>> volume.
>>>>
>>>> Uh, hello. Calm the **** down. I'm not attacking "your type."
>>>
>>> It's been a personal attack since your first post, as I am "my
>>> type".
>>
>>No.
>
> Denial doesn't change the fact.
>
>>>>>>> I'm glad you think otherwise. I also
>>>>>>> think art is a waste of time, but that doesn't mean I haven't
>>>>>>> created jobs for a number of artists.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well, aren't you special? Have you created as many jobs as the
>>>>>> industries I mentioned above?
>>>>>
>>>>> Uh, dude, I've played rolls in more than one of the industries
>>>>> you've listed.
>>>>
>>>> Roles, honey. And have you created as many jobs as those
>>>> industries? Just a question you didn't answer. I don't care
>>>> what
>>>> you've done in all those different industries. Your value in
>>>> different arenas may be real, but you still don't know English
>>>> lit
>>>> and apparently can't bear being told that you don't know
>>>> something.
>>>
>>> Wow, how the hell do you come up with this? What gives you the
>>> idea
>>> that I give a crap about lit?
>>
>>I don't think you do. I think you were just embarrassed by the
>>mistake you
>>made.
>
> Your reading comprehension failure is my mistake? Rich.
>
>>>Hey, here's a news flash for ya: I don't
>>> give a **** about gardening, either. I'm not really feeling too
>>> warm
>>> and fuzzy about golf, baseball, basketball, hockey, football, or
>>> soccer, either. Anything involving being the center of attention
>>> in
>>> front of a large group of people is out of the question as well
>>> which
>>> would be a major road block were I ever to remotely consider
>>> teaching.
>>>
>>> Just for the record: I know nothing about the subjects listed in
>>> the
>>> above paragraph. I have no doubt I would be a complete and utter
>>> failure in attempting to perform any of those tasks. I have no
>>> interest in even attempting to do anything, including, but not
>>> limited
>>> to, learning, studying, practicing, or really even discussing any
>>> of
>>> them.
>>>
>>> Although given the present company, teaching is an acceptable
>>> subject,
>>> as I am appreciative of the role you perform, and I can tell
>>> you're
>>> passionate about your subject.
>>>
>>> Again I offer my praise for your role, even though I have some
>>> personal disagreements with you. :-)
>>
>>Well, that, sir, is gracious. Get rid of some of your nasty little
>>insults
>>and you wouldn't be half bad.
>
> I've obviously changed my opinion of the quality of work you're
> capable of performing. Thank God I didn't go through your classroom;
> you've got to be one of the most ignorant instructors I've ever
> encountered. What state do you teach in?
>
>
> --
>

Talking to nimue is like talking to a brick wall. Can't you tell she
is intent on a fight no matter how civil you are. For every
compliment or civil comment you have given, and you have, she has
given the "nasty little insults" that she has accused you of. I see
that a lot in her posting history. Glad she didn't teach one of my
kids.


Chocolic

On Sat, 14 Jul 2007 08:29:41 -0400, "Murderous Speeding Drunken
Distracted Driver (Hector Goldstein)" > wrote:


>>>>> The techniques I
>>>>> from the books I've read have created employment, at above our
>>>>> state's average wage, for a number of people.
>>>>
>>>> Yay for you. So what? My point was that you have no knowledge of
>>>> literature. Saying you've made jobs won't change that.
>>>
>>> Really? I don't believe I ever said I claimed to have any knowledge of
>>> it.
>>
>>I never said you did.
>
>Read what I replied to; it's in start contrast to what you just wrote!

Not really. Whether you claimed to have knowledge of literature is
irrelevant to whether you do.

>Can't you maintain consistency with your own statements? God I feel
>sorry for the American student.
>

Murderous Speeding Drunken Distracted Driver (Hector Goldstein) wrote:
> nimue wrote:
>> Murderous Speeding Drunken Distracted Driver (Hector Goldstein)
>> wrote:
>>> nimue wrote:
>>>> Murderous Speeding Drunken Distracted Driver (Hector Goldstein)
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> nimue wrote:
>>>>> My curriculum did not require literature, fortunately, or if it
>>>>> did, it was only a semester's worth.
>>>>
>>>> It's one of the greatest works of English literature AND it is
>>>> present in current pop culture. People who don't have half your
>>>> claimed brains know what P&P is.
>>>
>>> What part of "I don't care for literature" are you having difficulty
>>> understanding?
>>
>> I know you don't. You just can't seem to leave it at that. You
>> need to tell me about all the things you are great at to make up for
>> it.
>
> Wow, your inability to comprehend what I'm writing escapes me.

Oh, I comprehend what you are writing. You know it, too.

> Now I
> am getting a clearer picture to why the American educational system is
> graduating so many morons incapable of competing on a global level. I
> rescind my prior thanks, and pray you weren't involved in my son's
> education.

Oh, please.
>
> <snip>
>>> Good; I'm glad I could help you out. I've performed consulting
>>> services for a few publishers.
>>
>> Well, aren't you just the savior of the universe. I've worked in
>> publishing, btw. I never met anyone as full of his own importance
>> as you. This whole thing started because of your arrogance.
>
> No, this whole thing started, and is perpetuated by your ignorance and
> inability to comprehend the trivial. I'm sorry that's beyond your
> ability to reason, but that's not my problem.

Honey, hurling accusations at me doesn't make them true.
>
>>>>> The techniques I
>>>>> from the books I've read have created employment, at above our
>>>>> state's average wage, for a number of people.
>>>>
>>>> Yay for you. So what? My point was that you have no knowledge of
>>>> literature. Saying you've made jobs won't change that.
>>>
>>> Really? I don't believe I ever said I claimed to have any knowledge
>>> of it.
>>
>> I never said you did.
>
> Read what I replied to; it's in start contrast to what you just wrote!

Honestly, I think you are projecting. I don't think you understand me or
what I am writing.

> Can't you maintain consistency with your own statements? God I feel
> sorry for the American student.

You're such a baby.
>
>>> I wrote that I read some when I was younger, but I preferred
>>> reading non-fiction.
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>>>
>>>>> Then you have done a most excellent job, IMO. Congrats!
>>>>
>>>> Well, then. Thank you.
>>>
>>> No problem.
>>>
>>>>> I didn't ask how many people you have educated; I asked how many
>>>>> jobs you've provided.
>>>>
>>>> I'm a teacher. Trust me, educating our kids is every bit as
>>>> important as creating jobs.
>>>
>>> I concur. Keep up the good work.
>>
>> Thank you again.
>
> I've changed my opinion, obviously.

Whatever. I don't think your good opinion was worth having.
>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>>>> Oh, my god! WHAT is your problem? How insecure are YOU? Yay
>>>>>> for you -- you've done a ton. However, I am quite sure you
>>>>>> haven't given as much joy to people -- or sparked as much
>>>>>> interest -- as good old Jane has.
>>>>>
>>>>> You know what? I haven't even tried.
>>>>
>>>> Here we go again -- you are absolutely convinced you would be great
>>>> at whatever you wanted to do.
>>>
>>> Exactly.
>>
>> So, you think you could be as popular and beloved as Jane Austen if
>> you only tried -- never mind that you don't like fiction and you
>> don't like literature and that thousands of writers who do have
>> tried and failed. Okay.
>
> That's not what I wrote. Sorry you are incapable of comprehending
> that.

Let's see. I wrote:

<<However, I am quite sure you
haven't given as much joy to people -- or sparked as much
interest -- as good old Jane has.>>

and you responded

<<You know what? I haven't even tried.>> What else could that mean other
than you believe if you tried, you could give as much joy and spark as much
interest as Jane? Maybe you would do it with Sobel filters -- but you think
you could. Arrogance. I have no idea what else it could mean, and I am
quite sure you won't tell me -- because you can't.


>
>>> I'm not interested in bringing in giving as much joy to people as
>>> gold old Jane is. I'm sorry. I don't have the talent, skill set, or
>>> appreciation required for the subject to produce what Jane is
>>> capable of producing.
>>
>> Thank god you've admitted it!
>
> I've *NEVER* attempted to deny it, moron.

No. However, you have made arrogant statements like the one I have quoted
twice now. Look just above and below. It's in both places.
>
>>> I'm really wondering how this can be such a difficult
>>> concept for you to grasp.
>>
>> Well when I write
>> <<However, I am quite sure you haven't given as much joy to people
>> -- or sparked as much interest -- as good old Jane has.>>
>>
>> and you respond with
>>
>> <<You know what? I haven't even tried>>
>>
>> it sure looks like you think you <<have the talent, skill set, [and]
>> appreciation required for the subject to produce what Jane is
>> capable of producing. >>
>
> No it doesn't, unless you have a reasonably serious reading
> comprehension issues. OMFG.

I don't have reading comp issues. Saying I do doesn't make it so.
>
> I don't give a crap about what Jane is capable of producing, other
> than the part it plays in the systems I design and produce. I've never
> indicated otherwise, and yet you insist otherwise.

God, you are so boring.
>
>>> That being said, though, I've done what I could to help people like
>>> Jane reach her audience. I've served as a consultant on the
>>> publication of a number of novels. The role I served was as much
>>> effort as I could and would put into the field of literature, and I
>>> enjoyed the tasks, and got paid reasonably well for very little
>>> effort. Very little, fairly specialized effort for which I had no
>>> training, but was able to pick up on the fly to meet the publisher's
>>> needs. So, yeah, in a sense literature has brought me joy, because I
>>> had fun on the production side of things. As for the content,
>>> though, it's merely information to be presented for rendering to
>>> media as far as I am concerned. First novel took about 30 minutes
>>> as I had to learn what needed to be done and develop an approach;
>>> after that it was about 5 minutes a pop. That's about all the time
>>> I cared to spend with them, even though I had them before the first
>>> drop of ink hit the paper. That literature brought me a great deal
>>> of joy.
>>>
>>>>> But I'll bet I've been directly responsible for putting more food
>>>>> on people's table than you have.
>>>>
>>>> That's nice for you. That doesn't change the fact that you don't
>>>> know English lit. Are you so freaked out about not knowing
>>>> something that you have to prove your worth to me?
>>>
>>> I never claimed to know english lit. I've tried to convey that it's
>>> absolutely valueless to me. I'm not bothered in the least by not
>>> knowing anything about it. I'm sorry you've misread that. Never
>>> claimed to be interested in it, either.
>>>
>>> I find joy in manipulating information. To me, literature is merely
>>> something I would stick in something called a "text" field. I enjoy,
>>> if given the opportunity, to be involved in production
>>>
>>>>> I'd also be willing to bet that the efforts performed by the
>>>>> people who filled those jobs is in AT LEAST one location in your
>>>>> house, and perhaps hundreds. So, by extension, my work is in your
>>>>> house. Is any of yours in mine?
>>>>
>>>> I doubt it. So what? You still don't know the Western canon and
>>>> my work is
>>>
>>> That's your ignorance, not mine.
>>
>> How is that my ignorance? Your lack of knowledge is your own
>> ignorance.
>
> Thanks again; this thread gets more entertaining with each of your
> posts. :-)

Really? It gets more and more boring with each of yours. You spend line
after line tooting your own horn about your supposed accomplishments and it
is just so DULL.
>
>>> I never claimed to be an expert on
>>> the canon.
>>>
>>>> still important -- very important. Who educated all those people
>>>> so that they would be able to fill those jobs?
>>>
>>> Dunno, but the only time I saw 'em reading lit was while they
>>> weren't doing their jobs.
>>
>> If they couldn't read lit, they couldn't do their jobs.
>
> ROTFLMAO.
>
>>> By the way, I know for a fact literature wasn't a requirement for
>>> their jobs. Nothing taught in schools besides basic english was
>>> required for the job. Creative ability and the ability to discern
>>> what was visually appealing.
>>
>> Do they have to interpret...anything?
>
> Not really.
>
>>> Ironically, for those reason, I could not have
>>> performed the jobs I was involved in creating. A required
>>> characteristic is missing, and it's linked to the same
>>> characteristic required to enjoy lit.
>>>
>>>>>> Clearly you care what I think. Why else are you dragging out
>>>>>> long, supposedly impressive, descriptions of the things you have
>>>>>> done?
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm an ass hole, and I'm bored at present. :-)
>>>>
>>>> I can understand that.
>>>
>>> Hey, progress! Finally you understand something.
>>
>> I understand that you are full of yourself.
>
> It's obvious your understanding is severely lacking.
>
Oh, you're not full of yourself? You're modest? This thread, chock-full of
lists of your accomplishments, your scorn for English literature, and your
belief that you can do anything, is modest? Sure.

>>> <snip>
>>>>>>> IMO, lit's a waste of time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't agree. I would say that the schools, universities,
>>>>>> libraries, bookstores, magazines, newspapers, publishing
>>>>>> companies, and the television and film industries (WOW! That's
>>>>>> a lot of JOBS!), to name just a few, don't agree with you,
>>>>>> either.
>>>>>
>>>>> ROTFLMAO. You just don't get it.
>>>>
>>>> What don't I get?
>>>
>>> THAT I HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO INTEREST WHATSOEVER IN LITERATURE. AS A
>>> RESULT, I'M NOT GOING TO KNOW A THING ABOUT IT, BECAUSE I HONESTLY
>>> JUST DO NOT CARE ABOUT THE SUBJECT.
>>
>> Yeah. I get that. Saying << I don't agree. I would say that the
>> schools, universities, libraries, bookstores, magazines, newspapers,
>> publishing companies, and the television and film industries (WOW!
>> That's a lot of JOBS!), to name just a few, don't agree with you,
>> either>> would seem to be a confirmation of the fact that I "get it."
>
> There may be hope for you yet.

I don't think there is any for you. I think the above shows YOU are the one
who has reading comp issues -- you don't understand what I am writing.
Well, since you haven't been trained to interpret, that's not too
surprising.
>
>>> To me, there are *much* more interesting things in life. I prefer to
>>> "expand my mind", if you will, by solving puzzles. It brings me
>>> tremendous joy.
>>>
>>>>> Without people like myself, you wouldn't have televisions,
>>>>> magazines, newspapers, or film. The only way you would be able to
>>>>> share your precious fiction would be by sitting around the camp
>>>>> fire in the cave grunting the story to your fellow neanderthals,
>>>>> or by passing hand-written scrolls around.
>>>>
>>>> Yeah -- I know that. I never said otherwise. Why do you think I
>>>> did? You're the one saying that "lit's a waste of time." I am not
>>>> knocking what you do. I don't know anything about it -- I can
>>>> admit that. You should learn to.
>>>>>
>>>>> Where would your career be without the printing press?
>>>>
>>>> What is your point? I never knocked technology -- or anything.
>>>> YOU knocked literature because you were embarrassed that you were
>>>> unfamiliar with it.
>>>
>>> I've never been embarrassed that I am unfamiliar with lit.
>>
>> Sure you are. Your behavior in this thread shows it.
>
> No it doesn't. What it demonstrates is that you are incapable of
> understanding the concept of apathy.

Oh, I know all about apathy. I feel it towards sports. I just think you
are embarrassed when you don't know something, whether you admit it or not.
Your vigorous denials and attempts to prove your worth and brilliance
indicate that you feel do feel embarrassed and are trying to make up for it.

>That's your failing, not mine,

But I do understand apathy.

> and it's also not my problem.

I would say your problem is a deep insecurity coupled with incredible
arrogance.

> It is, however, your student's problem.
> Fortunately for me, I get paid regardless of whether my code is in
> production in China, Korea, Israel, Chile, Venezuela, Germany, France,
> England, or France.

Whoo hoo. Man, how much about yourself are you going to tell me? Why are
you so bent on impressing me?
>
> By the way, how is western lit going to help me when I'm working with
> non-western civ?

I don't know how non-western civ will help me with literature, but I don't
knock its value.
>
>>> I am
>>> unfamiliar with it because I don't care about it. If I cared about
>>> it, I would be very knowledgable on the subject. I find there's far
>>> more interesting things in life than literature. I know little
>>> about it, and have absolutely no desire to learn any more about it
>>> than I already know. I'm more interested in the technical aspects
>>> of it's production, which I've found most intriguing in the past. I
>>> prefer to spend my time solving puzzles; in the past those puzzles
>>> have included "how do we get this novel to press?"
>>>
>>> My personal belief, and I know this is going to be totally beyond
>>> your comprehension,
>>
>> No, you don't know that.
>
> Yes, I do. Your posting history is indicative of that.

Oh, no it's not.
>
>>> is that there's far more joy in interactively solving
>>> such problems as there is in passively enjoying the benefits of
>>> fiction and the other cultural productions I've been involved in.
>>
>> Reading a book is an interactive experience. There are many
>> problems to be solved and explored in books -- ask any English prof.
>
> Look up "apathy." Get back to me.

Honey, if you were apathetic, this thread wouldn't be as long as it is. You
don't care about literature -- that's clear and fine. However, you do care
about proving how amazing you are in your field because (I assume) you are
ashamed that you don't know your English lit.
>
>>>>> Your type needs my type far more than my type needs yours. For
>>>>> without my type, literature would not exist no matter how much you
>>>>> wanted it too. Remember that the next time you crack open a
>>>>> volume.
>>>>
>>>> Uh, hello. Calm the **** down. I'm not attacking "your type."
>>>
>>> It's been a personal attack since your first post, as I am "my
>>> type".

Actually, you are personally attacking me -- my job, my worth, my abilities.
Can you deny it? Can you excuse it? Can you dish it out but not take it?
>>
>> No.
>
> Denial doesn't change the fact.

Are you aware that you are doing what you accuse me of doing?
>
>>>>>>> I'm glad you think otherwise. I also
>>>>>>> think art is a waste of time, but that doesn't mean I haven't
>>>>>>> created jobs for a number of artists.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well, aren't you special? Have you created as many jobs as the
>>>>>> industries I mentioned above?
>>>>>
>>>>> Uh, dude, I've played rolls in more than one of the industries
>>>>> you've listed.
>>>>
>>>> Roles, honey. And have you created as many jobs as those
>>>> industries? Just a question you didn't answer. I don't care what
>>>> you've done in all those different industries. Your value in
>>>> different arenas may be real, but you still don't know English lit
>>>> and apparently can't bear being told that you don't know something.
>>>
>>> Wow, how the hell do you come up with this? What gives you the idea
>>> that I give a crap about lit?
>>
>> I don't think you do. I think you were just embarrassed by the
>> mistake you made.
>
> Your reading comprehension failure is my mistake? Rich.

I haven't made any reading comp errors. Please show where I have. I can
show where you have. This whole thing started with one of yours.
>
>>> Hey, here's a news flash for ya: I don't
>>> give a **** about gardening, either. I'm not really feeling too warm
>>> and fuzzy about golf, baseball, basketball, hockey, football, or
>>> soccer, either. Anything involving being the center of attention in
>>> front of a large group of people is out of the question as well
>>> which would be a major road block were I ever to remotely consider
>>> teaching.
>>>
>>> Just for the record: I know nothing about the subjects listed in the
>>> above paragraph. I have no doubt I would be a complete and utter
>>> failure in attempting to perform any of those tasks. I have no
>>> interest in even attempting to do anything, including, but not
>>> limited to, learning, studying, practicing, or really even
>>> discussing any of them.
>>>
>>> Although given the present company, teaching is an acceptable
>>> subject, as I am appreciative of the role you perform, and I can
>>> tell you're passionate about your subject.
>>>
>>> Again I offer my praise for your role, even though I have some
>>> personal disagreements with you. :-)
>>
>> Well, that, sir, is gracious. Get rid of some of your nasty little
>> insults and you wouldn't be half bad.
>
> I've obviously changed my opinion of the quality of work you're
> capable of performing.

That's fine with me.

>Thank God I didn't go through your classroom;

I agree! Students with your insufferable arrogance and ignorance are always
difficult.

> you've got to be one of the most ignorant instructors I've ever
> encountered.

Honey, do you know what ignorant means? I know my subject.

>What state do you teach in?

--
nimue

"Let your freak-flag fly, and if someone doesn't get you, move on."
Drew Barrymore

Chocolic wrote:
> "Murderous Speeding Drunken Distracted Driver (Hector Goldstein)"
> > wrote in message
> ...
>> nimue wrote:
>>> Murderous Speeding Drunken Distracted Driver (Hector Goldstein)
>>> wrote:
>>>> nimue wrote:
>>>>> Murderous Speeding Drunken Distracted Driver (Hector Goldstein)
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> nimue wrote:
>>>>>> My curriculum did not require literature, fortunately, or if it
>>>>>> did,
>>>>>> it was only a semester's worth.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's one of the greatest works of English literature AND it is
>>>>> present in current pop culture. People who don't have half your
>>>>> claimed brains know what P&P is.
>>>>
>>>> What part of "I don't care for literature" are you having
>>>> difficulty
>>>> understanding?
>>>
>>> I know you don't. You just can't seem to leave it at that. You
>>> need to
>>> tell me about all the things you are great at to make up for it.
>>
>> Wow, your inability to comprehend what I'm writing escapes me. Now I
>> am getting a clearer picture to why the American educational system
>> is
>> graduating so many morons incapable of competing on a global level.
>> I
>> rescind my prior thanks, and pray you weren't involved in my son's
>> education.
>>
>> <snip>
>>>> Good; I'm glad I could help you out. I've performed consulting
>>>> services for a few publishers.
>>>
>>> Well, aren't you just the savior of the universe. I've worked in
>>> publishing, btw. I never met anyone as full of his own importance
>>> as you.
>>> This whole thing started because of your arrogance.
>>
>> No, this whole thing started, and is perpetuated by your ignorance
>> and
>> inability to comprehend the trivial. I'm sorry that's beyond your
>> ability to reason, but that's not my problem.
>>
>>>>>> The techniques I
>>>>>> from the books I've read have created employment, at above our
>>>>>> state's average wage, for a number of people.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yay for you. So what? My point was that you have no knowledge
>>>>> of
>>>>> literature. Saying you've made jobs won't change that.
>>>>
>>>> Really? I don't believe I ever said I claimed to have any
>>>> knowledge of
>>>> it.
>>>
>>> I never said you did.
>>
>> Read what I replied to; it's in start contrast to what you just
>> wrote!
>> Can't you maintain consistency with your own statements? God I feel
>> sorry for the American student.
>>
>>>> I wrote that I read some when I was younger, but I preferred
>>>> reading non-fiction.
>>>>
>>>> <snip>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Then you have done a most excellent job, IMO. Congrats!
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, then. Thank you.
>>>>
>>>> No problem.
>>>>
>>>>>> I didn't ask how many people you have educated; I asked how many
>>>>>> jobs you've provided.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm a teacher. Trust me, educating our kids is every bit as
>>>>> important as creating jobs.
>>>>
>>>> I concur. Keep up the good work.
>>>
>>> Thank you again.
>>
>> I've changed my opinion, obviously.
>>
>>>> <snip>
>>>>
>>>>>>> Oh, my god! WHAT is your problem? How insecure are YOU? Yay
>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>> you -- you've done a ton. However, I am quite sure you haven't
>>>>>>> given as much joy to people -- or sparked as much interest --
>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>> good old Jane has.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You know what? I haven't even tried.
>>>>>
>>>>> Here we go again -- you are absolutely convinced you would be
>>>>> great
>>>>> at whatever you wanted to do.
>>>>
>>>> Exactly.
>>>
>>> So, you think you could be as popular and beloved as Jane Austen if
>>> you only
>>> tried -- never mind that you don't like fiction and you don't like
>>> literature and that thousands of writers who do have tried and
>>> failed.
>>> Okay.
>>
>> That's not what I wrote. Sorry you are incapable of comprehending
>> that.
>>
>>>> I'm not interested in bringing in giving as much joy to people as
>>>> gold
>>>> old Jane is. I'm sorry. I don't have the talent, skill set, or
>>>> appreciation required for the subject to produce what Jane is
>>>> capable
>>>> of producing.
>>>
>>> Thank god you've admitted it!
>>
>> I've *NEVER* attempted to deny it, moron.
>>
>>>> I'm really wondering how this can be such a difficult
>>>> concept for you to grasp.
>>>
>>> Well when I write
>>> <<However, I am quite sure you haven't given as much joy to
>>> people -- or
>>> sparked as much interest -- as good old Jane has.>>
>>>
>>> and you respond with
>>>
>>> <<You know what? I haven't even tried>>
>>>
>>> it sure looks like you think you <<have the talent, skill set, [and]
>>> appreciation required for the subject to produce what Jane is
>>> capable of
>>> producing. >>
>>
>> No it doesn't, unless you have a reasonably serious reading
>> comprehension issues. OMFG.
>>
>> I don't give a crap about what Jane is capable of producing, other
>> than the part it plays in the systems I design and produce. I've
>> never
>> indicated otherwise, and yet you insist otherwise.
>>
>>>> That being said, though, I've done what I could to help people
>>>> like
>>>> Jane reach her audience. I've served as a consultant on the
>>>> publication of a number of novels. The role I served was as much
>>>> effort as I could and would put into the field of literature, and
>>>> I
>>>> enjoyed the tasks, and got paid reasonably well for very little
>>>> effort. Very little, fairly specialized effort for which I had no
>>>> training, but was able to pick up on the fly to meet the
>>>> publisher's
>>>> needs. So, yeah, in a sense literature has brought me joy, because
>>>> I
>>>> had fun on the production side of things. As for the content,
>>>> though,
>>>> it's merely information to be presented for rendering to media as
>>>> far
>>>> as I am concerned. First novel took about 30 minutes as I had to
>>>> learn
>>>> what needed to be done and develop an approach; after that it was
>>>> about 5 minutes a pop. That's about all the time I cared to spend
>>>> with
>>>> them, even though I had them before the first drop of ink hit the
>>>> paper. That literature brought me a great deal of joy.
>>>>
>>>>>> But I'll bet I've been directly responsible for putting more
>>>>>> food on
>>>>>> people's table than you have.
>>>>>
>>>>> That's nice for you. That doesn't change the fact that you don't
>>>>> know English lit. Are you so freaked out about not knowing
>>>>> something that you have to prove your worth to me?
>>>>
>>>> I never claimed to know english lit. I've tried to convey that
>>>> it's
>>>> absolutely valueless to me. I'm not bothered in the least by not
>>>> knowing anything about it. I'm sorry you've misread that. Never
>>>> claimed to be interested in it, either.
>>>>
>>>> I find joy in manipulating information. To me, literature is
>>>> merely
>>>> something I would stick in something called a "text" field. I
>>>> enjoy,
>>>> if given the opportunity, to be involved in production
>>>>
>>>>>> I'd also be willing to bet that the efforts performed by the
>>>>>> people
>>>>>> who filled those jobs is in AT LEAST one location in your house,
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> perhaps hundreds. So, by extension, my work is in your house. Is
>>>>>> any
>>>>>> of yours in mine?
>>>>>
>>>>> I doubt it. So what? You still don't know the Western canon and
>>>>> my
>>>>> work is
>>>>
>>>> That's your ignorance, not mine.
>>>
>>> How is that my ignorance? Your lack of knowledge is your own
>>> ignorance.
>>
>> Thanks again; this thread gets more entertaining with each of your
>> posts. :-)
>>
>>>> I never claimed to be an expert on
>>>> the canon.
>>>>
>>>>> still important -- very important. Who educated all those people
>>>>> so
>>>>> that they would be able to fill those jobs?
>>>>
>>>> Dunno, but the only time I saw 'em reading lit was while they
>>>> weren't
>>>> doing their jobs.
>>>
>>> If they couldn't read lit, they couldn't do their jobs.
>>
>> ROTFLMAO.
>>
>>>> By the way, I know for a fact literature wasn't a requirement for
>>>> their jobs. Nothing taught in schools besides basic english was
>>>> required for the job. Creative ability and the ability to discern
>>>> what
>>>> was visually appealing.
>>>
>>> Do they have to interpret...anything?
>>
>> Not really.
>>
>>>> Ironically, for those reason, I could not have
>>>> performed the jobs I was involved in creating. A required
>>>> characteristic is missing, and it's linked to the same
>>>> characteristic
>>>> required to enjoy lit.
>>>>
>>>>>>> Clearly you care what I think. Why else are you dragging out
>>>>>>> long,
>>>>>>> supposedly impressive, descriptions of the things you have
>>>>>>> done?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm an ass hole, and I'm bored at present. :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> I can understand that.
>>>>
>>>> Hey, progress! Finally you understand something.
>>>
>>> I understand that you are full of yourself.
>>
>> It's obvious your understanding is severely lacking.
>>
>>>> <snip>
>>>>>>>> IMO, lit's a waste of time.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't agree. I would say that the schools, universities,
>>>>>>> libraries, bookstores, magazines, newspapers, publishing
>>>>>>> companies,
>>>>>>> and the television and film industries (WOW! That's a lot of
>>>>>>> JOBS!), to name just a few, don't agree with you, either.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ROTFLMAO. You just don't get it.
>>>>>
>>>>> What don't I get?
>>>>
>>>> THAT I HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO INTEREST WHATSOEVER IN LITERATURE. AS A
>>>> RESULT, I'M NOT GOING TO KNOW A THING ABOUT IT, BECAUSE I HONESTLY
>>>> JUST DO NOT CARE ABOUT THE SUBJECT.
>>>
>>> Yeah. I get that. Saying << I don't agree. I would say that the
>>> schools,
>>> universities, libraries, bookstores, magazines, newspapers,
>>> publishing
>>> companies, and the television and film industries (WOW! That's a
>>> lot of
>>> JOBS!), to name just a few, don't agree with you, either>> would
>>> seem to be
>>> a confirmation of the fact that I "get it."
>>
>> There may be hope for you yet.
>>
>>>> To me, there are *much* more interesting things in life. I prefer
>>>> to
>>>> "expand my mind", if you will, by solving puzzles. It brings me
>>>> tremendous joy.
>>>>
>>>>>> Without people like myself, you wouldn't have televisions,
>>>>>> magazines, newspapers, or film. The only way you would be able
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> share your precious fiction would be by sitting around the camp
>>>>>> fire in the cave grunting the story to your fellow neanderthals,
>>>>>> or
>>>>>> by passing hand-written scrolls around.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yeah -- I know that. I never said otherwise. Why do you think I
>>>>> did?
>>>>> You're the one saying that "lit's a waste of time." I am not
>>>>> knocking what you do. I don't know anything about it -- I can
>>>>> admit
>>>>> that. You should learn to.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Where would your career be without the printing press?
>>>>>
>>>>> What is your point? I never knocked technology -- or anything.
>>>>> YOU
>>>>> knocked literature because you were embarrassed that you were
>>>>> unfamiliar with it.
>>>>
>>>> I've never been embarrassed that I am unfamiliar with lit.
>>>
>>> Sure you are. Your behavior in this thread shows it.
>>
>> No it doesn't. What it demonstrates is that you are incapable of
>> understanding the concept of apathy. That's your failing, not mine,
>> and it's also not my problem. It is, however, your student's
>> problem.
>> Fortunately for me, I get paid regardless of whether my code is in
>> production in China, Korea, Israel, Chile, Venezuela, Germany,
>> France,
>> England, or France.
>>
>> By the way, how is western lit going to help me when I'm working
>> with
>> non-western civ?
>>
>>>> I am
>>>> unfamiliar with it because I don't care about it. If I cared about
>>>> it,
>>>> I would be very knowledgable on the subject. I find there's far
>>>> more
>>>> interesting things in life than literature. I know little about
>>>> it,
>>>> and have absolutely no desire to learn any more about it than I
>>>> already know. I'm more interested in the technical aspects of it's
>>>> production, which I've found most intriguing in the past. I prefer
>>>> to
>>>> spend my time solving puzzles; in the past those puzzles have
>>>> included
>>>> "how do we get this novel to press?"
>>>>
>>>> My personal belief, and I know this is going to be totally beyond
>>>> your
>>>> comprehension,
>>>
>>> No, you don't know that.
>>
>> Yes, I do. Your posting history is indicative of that.
>>
>>>> is that there's far more joy in interactively solving
>>>> such problems as there is in passively enjoying the benefits of
>>>> fiction and the other cultural productions I've been involved in.
>>>
>>> Reading a book is an interactive experience. There are many
>>> problems to be
>>> solved and explored in books -- ask any English prof.
>>
>> Look up "apathy." Get back to me.
>>
>>>>>> Your type needs my type far more than my type needs yours. For
>>>>>> without my type, literature would not exist no matter how much
>>>>>> you
>>>>>> wanted it too. Remember that the next time you crack open a
>>>>>> volume.
>>>>>
>>>>> Uh, hello. Calm the **** down. I'm not attacking "your type."
>>>>
>>>> It's been a personal attack since your first post, as I am "my
>>>> type".
>>>
>>> No.
>>
>> Denial doesn't change the fact.
>>
>>>>>>>> I'm glad you think otherwise. I also
>>>>>>>> think art is a waste of time, but that doesn't mean I haven't
>>>>>>>> created jobs for a number of artists.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Well, aren't you special? Have you created as many jobs as the
>>>>>>> industries I mentioned above?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Uh, dude, I've played rolls in more than one of the industries
>>>>>> you've listed.
>>>>>
>>>>> Roles, honey. And have you created as many jobs as those
>>>>> industries? Just a question you didn't answer. I don't care
>>>>> what
>>>>> you've done in all those different industries. Your value in
>>>>> different arenas may be real, but you still don't know English
>>>>> lit
>>>>> and apparently can't bear being told that you don't know
>>>>> something.
>>>>
>>>> Wow, how the hell do you come up with this? What gives you the
>>>> idea
>>>> that I give a crap about lit?
>>>
>>> I don't think you do. I think you were just embarrassed by the
>>> mistake you
>>> made.
>>
>> Your reading comprehension failure is my mistake? Rich.
>>
>>>> Hey, here's a news flash for ya: I don't
>>>> give a **** about gardening, either. I'm not really feeling too
>>>> warm
>>>> and fuzzy about golf, baseball, basketball, hockey, football, or
>>>> soccer, either. Anything involving being the center of attention
>>>> in
>>>> front of a large group of people is out of the question as well
>>>> which
>>>> would be a major road block were I ever to remotely consider
>>>> teaching.
>>>>
>>>> Just for the record: I know nothing about the subjects listed in
>>>> the
>>>> above paragraph. I have no doubt I would be a complete and utter
>>>> failure in attempting to perform any of those tasks. I have no
>>>> interest in even attempting to do anything, including, but not
>>>> limited
>>>> to, learning, studying, practicing, or really even discussing any
>>>> of
>>>> them.
>>>>
>>>> Although given the present company, teaching is an acceptable
>>>> subject,
>>>> as I am appreciative of the role you perform, and I can tell
>>>> you're
>>>> passionate about your subject.
>>>>
>>>> Again I offer my praise for your role, even though I have some
>>>> personal disagreements with you. :-)
>>>
>>> Well, that, sir, is gracious. Get rid of some of your nasty little
>>> insults
>>> and you wouldn't be half bad.
>>
>> I've obviously changed my opinion of the quality of work you're
>> capable of performing. Thank God I didn't go through your classroom;
>> you've got to be one of the most ignorant instructors I've ever
>> encountered. What state do you teach in?
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>
> Talking to nimue is like talking to a brick wall. Can't you tell she
> is intent on a fight no matter how civil you are.

Oh, he hasn't been civil. He gave me a few compliments and I thanked him.
He then retracted him. He spent most of his time insulting me, however.
You do the same -- perhaps that is why you see it as civil.

>For every
> compliment or civil comment you have given,

I have said "Thank you." Did you miss that? I also called him gracious.

> and you have,

Yes, he did. He then retracted them. However, I thanked him when he did.

>she has
> given the "nasty little insults" that she has accused you of.

He has insulted me quite thoroughly. You know it.

> I see
> that a lot in her posting history. Glad she didn't teach one of my
> kids.

And now you insult me, too. How nice -- feel big, now?
>
>
> Chocolic

--
nimue

"Let your freak-flag fly, and if someone doesn't get you, move on."
Drew Barrymore

David Johnston wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Jul 2007 08:29:41 -0400, "Murderous Speeding Drunken
> Distracted Driver (Hector Goldstein)" > wrote:
>
>
>>>>>> The techniques I
>>>>>> from the books I've read have created employment, at above our
>>>>>> state's average wage, for a number of people.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yay for you. So what? My point was that you have no knowledge of
>>>>> literature. Saying you've made jobs won't change that.
>>>>
>>>> Really? I don't believe I ever said I claimed to have any
>>>> knowledge of it.
>>>
>>> I never said you did.
>>
>> Read what I replied to; it's in start contrast to what you just
>> wrote!
>
> Not really. Whether you claimed to have knowledge of literature is
> irrelevant to whether you do.

Thank you. I don't think he understands that. He never said he has a
knowledge of English lit -- I just needled him for not having it. I think
he is ashamed of not having it, hence his desperate attempt to prove his
value in other ways. He may have value in other ways, but he still doesn't
know English lit. I think he has misunderstood me because his reading comp
isn't what it should be. He projects that onto me.
>
>> Can't you maintain consistency with your own statements? God I feel
>> sorry for the American student.

--
nimue

"Let your freak-flag fly, and if someone doesn't get you, move on."
Drew Barrymore

"Chocolic" > wrote:
>Talking to nimue is like talking to a brick wall. Can't you tell she
>is intent on a fight no matter how civil you are. For every
>compliment or civil comment you have given, and you have, she has
>given the "nasty little insults" that she has accused you of. I see
>that a lot in her posting history. Glad she didn't teach one of my
>kids.

Agreed whole heartedly.

Thanks for the confirmation.


--

We're all here
because we're not all there.

nimue wrote:
>Thank you. I don't think he understands that. He never said he has a
>knowledge of English lit -- I just needled him for not having it. I think
>he is ashamed of not having it, hence his desperate attempt to prove his
>value in other ways. He may have value in other ways, but he still doesn't
>know English lit. I think he has misunderstood me because his reading comp
>isn't what it should be. He projects that onto me.

I have no shame in not having knowledge of english lit. I remember my
exposure to Macbeth in High School to be one of the biggest wastes of
time that I've encountered.

The "other ways" and "arrogance" you keep harping on in regards to
listing past accomplishments are examples of your failure to
understand as well. In the areas in which I work, examples are
sometimes used to support theory. Those examples were provided to
support the statements made by a number of my prior educators at all
points of my education, not as an ego boost.

That was brought up because you asked why I thought I could be a
neurosurgeon. That's because many who have played the roll of teacher
in my life have stated that I could do anything that I wanted to. I
provided examples to demonstrate proof of their collective theory.

If I wanted to do neurosurgery, I could do neurosurgery. Those in your
field have told me so. That's how I know I could do neurosurgery. I'm
sorry the opinion of your peers is insufficient for you.

The rest of your retarded crap in those other two screeds isn't worth
replying to.






--

We're all here
because we're not all there.

Murderous Speeding Drunken Distracted Driver (Hector Goldstein) wrote:
> nimue wrote:
>> Thank you. I don't think he understands that. He never said he has
>> a knowledge of English lit -- I just needled him for not having it.
>> I think he is ashamed of not having it, hence his desperate attempt
>> to prove his value in other ways. He may have value in other ways,
>> but he still doesn't know English lit. I think he has misunderstood
>> me because his reading comp isn't what it should be. He projects
>> that onto me.
>
> I have no shame in not having knowledge of english lit. I remember my
> exposure to Macbeth in High School to be one of the biggest wastes of
> time that I've encountered.
>
> The "other ways" and "arrogance" you keep harping on in regards to
> listing past accomplishments are examples of your failure to
> understand as well. In the areas in which I work, examples are
> sometimes used to support theory.

Really? This may come as a big shock to you, but that is how it works in my
field, too. That's how you prove your essay's thesis. That said, there
really was no need for you to post long, intricate lists of your many
accomplishments. They were boring and they weren't even germane. I said
you didn't know English lit. You don't. There was no need to tell me what
you DO know -- unless you needed to prove something.

>Those examples were provided to
> support the statements made by a number of my prior educators at all
> points of my education, not as an ego boost.

Sure. However, my point was you that you don't know English lit. You
don't. I never said you didn't know anything else and there was no need to
prove that you do.
>
> That was brought up because you asked why I thought I could be a
> neurosurgeon.

True. However, you kept on posting your lists long after the conversation
turned. I will say that I still don't know if you could be a neurosurgeon.
I KNOW I couldn't. I don't know about you.

>That's because many who have played the roll

Role.

>of teacher
> in my life have stated that I could do anything that I wanted to.

Well, you could not have been a professor of English literature -- or do you
think you could? I assume you will say you never wanted to do anything so
worthless.

> I
> provided examples to demonstrate proof of their collective theory.

You provided lists of what you have accomplished so you could show how
"worthy" you are. You also wanted to show that your accomplishments were
more valuable than mine, and more valuable than the accomplishments of any
mere author.
>
> If I wanted to do neurosurgery, I could do neurosurgery.

Fine.

>Those in your
> field have told me so. That's how I know I could do neurosurgery.

Have you ever heard the expression, "You never know until you have tried"?

>I'm
> sorry the opinion of your peers is insufficient for you.

All I really have is what you have said. You do realize you just said that
I am equal to those people, right?
>
> The rest of your retarded crap in those other two screeds isn't worth
> replying to.

Sweetie, saying I am retarded -- and that's really not PC, just FYI --
doesn't make it true. It won't change my opinion of you. I don't know if
it makes you feel any better. I doubt it, since you keep compulsively
trying to convince me of something while insulting me at the same time.

--
nimue

"Let your freak-flag fly, and if someone doesn't get you, move on."
Drew Barrymore