A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

When to acknowledge ATC



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old May 11th 05, 04:18 AM
Steven P. McNicoll
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...

Whatever. You did, but you're too busy being the kettle and calling all
the other pots black to notice. Probably has something to do with YOUR
monumental ego.

For giggles, let's assume you didn't misread my post. I suppose you were
just reiterating the same point I'd already made then?

What other reason would you have for posting the reply to my post that you
did? I wrote that the previous poster was incorrect, then you replied
saying exactly that. Is that the new Usenet standard now? To just go
around quoting articles and restating what's already been written?


But you didn't write that the previous poster was incorrect, you wrote, "Not
that the previous poster is correct in what he says". Those statements are
not equivalent, stating that you're not saying the previous poster is
correct is not saying that he's incorrect.

I didn't misinterpret your post, you simply misspoke.


  #2  
Old May 11th 05, 06:24 AM
Peter Duniho
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
k.net...
But you didn't write that the previous poster was incorrect, you wrote,
"Not that the previous poster is correct in what he says". Those
statements are not equivalent, stating that you're not saying the previous
poster is correct is not saying that he's incorrect.


It's not saying that he is correct either. Even ignoring your absurd
equivocation over what "not that" means and your egotistical refusal to
properly interpret my statement, there was no need for your reply.

As usual, since you're willing to take the most ridiculous stance and carry
it to genuinely silly extremes, you once again get the last word. I'm not
wasting any more time on your idiotic "no I didn't"s. I hope at least you
get as much satisfaction from your empty last word as I do from knowing
that, while you are compelled to respond with ever-increasing foolishness,
no matter how far it takes you, that I am able to resist replying to your
foolishness.

And just because I can...

WHATever.

Pete


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
What F-102 units were called up for Viet Nam Tarver Engineering Military Aviation 101 March 5th 06 03:13 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:36 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.