My last post

On 10/24/2004 1:42 PM Tom Phillips spake thus:

Tom Phillips wrote:

David Nebenzahl wrote:

Oh, like it makes a difference _how_ you crossposted...

Yes, it does make a difference, Virginia.

No. It doesn't. Not for your purpose and intent...

Or does it suit you to play fast and loose with terms like "crossposting" when
you're disputing them, but strict and precise when you're defending your
definition of "photography"?

You're making a semantical argument. So now you're also a hypocrite...

Of course I'm making a semantic (not semantical) argument, you ninny: we're
talking about the meaning of a word (crossposting) here.

Or do you want words to mean just what *you* want them to mean, like in _Alice
in Wonderland_?

BTW, what constitutes photography is still whether you actually
create a photograph resulting from using a photographic medium.

You actually made a crosspost. You didn't change the medium or
result; you just changed the way header was posted.

Not according to the Hacker's Dictionary, which is a widely respected source
on such matters:

http://hackersdictionary.com/html/entry/cross-post.html

I'll let other disinterested parties decide whether what I did was crossposting.


--
Everybody's worried about stopping terrorism. Well, there's a
really easy way: stop participating in it.

- Noam Chomsky

David Nebenzahl wrote:

On 10/24/2004 1:42 PM Tom Phillips spake thus:

Tom Phillips wrote:

David Nebenzahl wrote:

Oh, like it makes a difference _how_ you crossposted...

Yes, it does make a difference, Virginia.

No. It doesn't. Not for your purpose and intent...

Or does it suit you to play fast and loose with terms like "crossposting" when
you're disputing them, but strict and precise when you're defending your
definition of "photography"?

You're making a semantical argument. So now you're also a hypocrite...

Of course I'm making a semantic (not semantical) argument, you ninny: we're
talking about the meaning of a word (crossposting) here.

Yes, I _know_ why you did it...(i.e., david thinks only
he perceives his game...just like a troll thinks _he_ is
on a higher plane of nsg awareness.)

Or do you want words to mean just what *you* want them to mean, like in _Alice
in Wonderland_?

What you utterly failed and still fail to graps is the
REAL difference between the processes and the difference
in what they _actually_ produce. Or, like a troll do know
the difference yet argue on anyway. If you can prove digital
sensors produce an actual image instead of electrons and
digital signals, do it and stop wasting everyone's time.
Otherwise, you _are_ trolling.

There simply is no photograph produced in the digital
process. Just doesn't happen and _can't_ happen. There's
a little barrier there related to the physics of the process.
Now, you want to call that a semantical argument go ahead.
You want to cross post to make a point you're not articulate
or intelligent enough to put into words go ahead. But that's
what a troll does...make posts that violate netiquette in
order to argure for the sake of arguing....

BTW, what constitutes photography is still whether you actually
create a photograph resulting from using a photographic medium.

You actually made a crosspost. You didn't change the medium or
result; you just changed the way header was posted.

Not according to the Hacker's Dictionary, which is a widely respected source
on such matters:

http://hackersdictionary.com/html/entry/cross-post.html

I'll let other disinterested parties decide whether what I did was crossposting.

ALL you did was make a crosspost minus the usual conventions
of crossposting in order to be a smart ass.

You succeeded, and like a good troll also fools others into
thinking you're not trolling.

David Nebenzahl wrote:
: On 10/24/2004 1:42 PM Tom Phillips spake thus:

: Tom Phillips wrote:
:
: David Nebenzahl wrote:
:
: Oh, like it makes a difference _how_ you crossposted...
:
: Yes, it does make a difference, Virginia.
:
: No. It doesn't. Not for your purpose and intent...
:
: Or does it suit you to play fast and loose with terms like "crossposting" when
: you're disputing them, but strict and precise when you're defending your
: definition of "photography"?
:
: You're making a semantical argument. So now you're also a hypocrite...

: Of course I'm making a semantic (not semantical) argument, you ninny: we're
: talking about the meaning of a word (crossposting) here.

: Or do you want words to mean just what *you* want them to mean, like in _Alice
: in Wonderland_?

: BTW, what constitutes photography is still whether you actually
: create a photograph resulting from using a photographic medium.
:
: You actually made a crosspost. You didn't change the medium or
: result; you just changed the way header was posted.

: Not according to the Hacker's Dictionary, which is a widely respected source
: on such matters:

: http://hackersdictionary.com/html/entry/cross-post.html

: I'll let other disinterested parties decide whether what I did was crossposting.


I'm starting to think that Tom is one of scarpitti's aliases.
--




Keep working millions on welfare depend on you
-------------------

Frank Pittel wrote:

David Nebenzahl wrote:
: On 10/24/2004 1:42 PM Tom Phillips spake thus:

: Tom Phillips wrote:
:
: David Nebenzahl wrote:
:
: Oh, like it makes a difference _how_ you crossposted...
:
: Yes, it does make a difference, Virginia.
:
: No. It doesn't. Not for your purpose and intent...
:
: Or does it suit you to play fast and loose with terms like "crossposting" when
: you're disputing them, but strict and precise when you're defending your
: definition of "photography"?
:
: You're making a semantical argument. So now you're also a hypocrite...

: Of course I'm making a semantic (not semantical) argument, you ninny: we're
: talking about the meaning of a word (crossposting) here.

: Or do you want words to mean just what *you* want them to mean, like in _Alice
: in Wonderland_?

: BTW, what constitutes photography is still whether you actually
: create a photograph resulting from using a photographic medium.
:
: You actually made a crosspost. You didn't change the medium or
: result; you just changed the way header was posted.

: Not according to the Hacker's Dictionary, which is a widely respected source
: on such matters:

: http://hackersdictionary.com/html/entry/cross-post.html

: I'll let other disinterested parties decide whether what I did was crossposting.

I'm starting to think that Tom is one of scarpitti's aliases.

Odd, considering David is the one behaving like a troll.

He of course is self amused by his apparent cleaverness.
In reality his puerile method of making a point is transparent.

What is bizarre is someone would actually go to all the trouble
to think up such a surreptitious and disingenuous way to make
their point (i.e., crossposting) and continue an argument he
can't otherwise win through straightforward and honest arguing.

Frank Pittel wrote:

David Nebenzahl wrote:
: On 10/24/2004 1:42 PM Tom Phillips spake thus:

: Tom Phillips wrote:
:
: David Nebenzahl wrote:
:
: Oh, like it makes a difference _how_ you crossposted...
:
: Yes, it does make a difference, Virginia.
:
: No. It doesn't. Not for your purpose and intent...
:
: Or does it suit you to play fast and loose with terms like "crossposting" when
: you're disputing them, but strict and precise when you're defending your
: definition of "photography"?
:
: You're making a semantical argument. So now you're also a hypocrite...

: Of course I'm making a semantic (not semantical) argument, you ninny: we're
: talking about the meaning of a word (crossposting) here.

: Or do you want words to mean just what *you* want them to mean, like in _Alice
: in Wonderland_?

: BTW, what constitutes photography is still whether you actually
: create a photograph resulting from using a photographic medium.
:
: You actually made a crosspost. You didn't change the medium or
: result; you just changed the way header was posted.

: Not according to the Hacker's Dictionary, which is a widely respected source
: on such matters:

: http://hackersdictionary.com/html/entry/cross-post.html

: I'll let other disinterested parties decide whether what I did was crossposting.

I'm starting to think that Tom is one of scarpitti's aliases.

Odd, considering David is the one behaving like a troll.

He of course is self amused by his apparent cleaverness.
In reality his puerile method of making a point is transparent.

What is bizarre is someone would actually go to all the trouble
to think up such a surreptitious and disingenuous way to make
their point (i.e., crossposting) and continue an argument he
can't otherwise win through straightforward and honest arguing.

In article ,
Tom Phillips wrote:

What is bizarre is someone would actually go to all the trouble
to think up such a surreptitious and disingenuous way to make
their point (i.e., crossposting)

Or using BIG Words the average reader
has to look up ;-)

and continue an argument he
can't otherwise win through straightforward and honest arguing.

Like any arguments your involved in. :^)
--
LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918

In article ,
Tom Phillips wrote:

What is bizarre is someone would actually go to all the trouble
to think up such a surreptitious and disingenuous way to make
their point (i.e., crossposting)

Or using BIG Words the average reader
has to look up ;-)

and continue an argument he
can't otherwise win through straightforward and honest arguing.

Like any arguments your involved in. :^)
--
LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918

Gregory W Blank wrote:

In article ,
Tom Phillips wrote:

What is bizarre is someone would actually go to all the trouble
to think up such a surreptitious and disingenuous way to make
their point (i.e., crossposting)

Or using BIG Words the average reader
has to look up ;-)

Well, I _could_ have just said he was sneaky, I suppose.

OTOH I don't think David is "average." He's too full of guile. :-)

and continue an argument he
can't otherwise win through straightforward and honest arguing.

Like any arguments your involved in. :^)

I've thought about running for office...

In article ,
Tom Phillips wrote:

Like any arguments your involved in. :^)

I've thought about running for office...

Oh Puuuleaze,....I would rather NOT think of you in that
light (slithery creepy under the rock & kind of dim),
photographic "Daylight".... is much better
--
LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918

Gregory W Blank wrote:

In article ,
Tom Phillips wrote:

Like any arguments your involved in. :^)

I've thought about running for office...

Oh Puuuleaze,....I would rather NOT think of you in that
light (slithery creepy under the rock & kind of dim),
photographic "Daylight".... is much better

Wouldn't work anyway. No good at lying and never been
good at non-denial denials...

--
LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918