From: Richard S. Holmes (rsholmes_at_MailBox.Syr.Edu)
Date: Tue May 27 2003 - 09:43:47 PDT
Jesse Welton <jwelton_at_pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu> writes: > == 209:10 === > > > All future rules must include an /ad hominem/ attack. And if you don't > > know what that is, because you don't speak Latin... there are no words. > > What, do you think you're some kind of Joshua-level genius, throwing > around scholarly terminology just to make you look smart? Freakin' > necrolinguaphile. Each future rule must use a previously unused > abstruse term, just to prove how very erudite we all are. > > -- > Rule Date: 2003-05-27 14:35:16 GMT > Validity: Quotes and comments on previous rule's sarcasm, I think. Acknowledges (perhaps sarcastically) Joshua's genius. VALID. Style: +1.5 -- - Rich Holmes Syracuse, NY "We're waist deep in the Big Muddy And the big fool says to push on." -- Pete Seeger -- Rule Date: 2003-05-27 16:44:08 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Nov 24 2011 - 10:48 PST