Re: is it viable for david to be any more of an ass clown?

On Apr 30, 4:42=A0pm, The Real Doctor <ubergeek...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
> On 29 Apr, 16:39, David <pchristain...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > It was never the nicest board on the web. =A0Why you,
> > who I don't even know, pick a quarrel with me is
> > inexplicable.
>
> Perhaps you simply don't realise how many people you annoy or upset
> with your obsessive ranting. Or perhaps, as at Wellesley (before they
> threw you out) you know perfectly well and don't care.
>
> Or enjoy it?
>
> Ian

You are on a very shaky ground with your observations.

The annoyance you sensed on the Internet was all from
people who did not examine what I was saying in a
scholarly way.  IOW they were prejudiced.  You yourself
have a fixed mentality that is not flexible.

Then again, you should admit to SRQers that you actually
know very little as to why Wellesley Meeting removed my
member****p years ago.  (Why do we have to talk about it
now?)

When will you find the cause of your ignorance?

=2E..

David Christainsen