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