Re: Why why *WHY*???

From: Joseph Delacroix <hk512_at_cleveland.Freenet.Edu>
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 1996 20:47:59 -0500 sez:

>*That* was a flame, Joseph?
>No, that was not. *That* was an intelligent answer to the question
>*The Question* itself was a flame. Aimed to all the wusses who think
>that only pics of naked whatever comprise the Net...
>David Gonterman


Overcaution is, alas, one of my main vices. Even I did not believe what I
wrote was a "flame", but past experience dictated my disclaimer at the top
of my reply as necessary. However, it is good that you were merely
being sarcastic at the time you put the one line troll at the bottom of
your message; probably anything less than a full apology from you if you
had tried to reply to me would have caused me to become unpleasant.

Ol' Joe's been a hair-trigger lately, to put it lightly. All of the
various idiotic C-SPAN coverage of the Second Coming of Exon, a bad
head cold, unpleasant scholastic experiences, and some various other
minor irritations have gradually worn my fuse down to a tiny, tiny nub.
I'd bet that unless I get a good dose of NyQuil here pretty soon, I'm
going to have to go medieval on some people's buttocks.

Sharpening my Swiss Army Knife,


  | Joseph deLaCroix: | See: |
  / MiSTie, orange fox, writer, MUCKer, builder, hacker, cynic, wiseass \
  He slices! He dices! He crushes! He bashes! He liquifies and chops!
  Information wants to be sold for exorbitant fees, then totally devalued

Received on Mon Feb 05 1996 - 22:00:23 PST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Thu Mar 19 2015 - 12:17:03 PDT