Re: Labels for memes

From: joedees@bellsouth.net
Date: Wed Feb 14 2001 - 22:11:10 GMT

  • Next message: Wade T.Smith: "Re: Darwinian evolution vs memetic evolution"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id WAA22243 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Wed, 14 Feb 2001 22:07:33 GMT
    From: <joedees@bellsouth.net>
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 16:11:10 -0600
    Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
    Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
    Subject: Re: Labels for memes
    Message-ID: <3A8AAE1E.31640.3AE799D@localhost>
    In-reply-to: <20010214211103.A1527@reborntechnology.co.uk>
    References: <3A8A84B1.8000.30CA1F5@localhost>; from joedees@bellsouth.net on Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 01:14:25PM -0600
    X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c)
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    > I just noticed there's a strange arrangement of quote marks (>) at the
    > beginning of your authors+titles list. Interesting...
    >
    > > Your first
    > > denunciation was that I had simply supplied a list of authors, minus
    > > titles, and i inserted the titles within THAT VERY MESSAGE the
    > > moment I received it, and resent it - long before receiving your
    > > confused screed concerning another book entirely.
    >
    > Yes, I'm confused, Joe, but only about what's in your mind. I'd no
    > idea you tried such a clumsy attempt to make me look bad, and I
    > certainly never accused you of it, but now you've drawn my attention
    > to it, that's the only interpretation I can see, the only "sense" I
    > can make of it. But it's so f***ing stupid! Anyone interested only
    > needs to go back and look at the original message! What the f**k are
    > you thinking of, Joe?
    >
    The info was immediately put in the message and it was resent because
    YOU made such a BIG F**KING DEAL about it not being there in the first
    place, head cheese. That's the sense your benighted brain cannot bring
    itself to see. Make THAT into a conspiracy!
    >
    > I've now had enough of this silliness. There is enough information
    > here for anyone to go back and look at the actual messages in the
    > archives. The Subject line reads "Re: Darwinian evolution vs memetic
    > evolution", and all the relevant messages are dated 6 Feb. Though I
    > doubt if anyone cares that much. You can have the last word if you
    > like, Joe. Much good may it do you!
    >
    It was necessary to once again scoop up and discard yet another
    shovel-load of your rampant and wrongheaded bullsh*t.
    > --
    > Robin Faichney
    > robin@reborntechnology.co.uk
    >
    > ===============================================================
    > This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    > Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    > For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
    > see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
    >
    >

    ===============================================================
    This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
    see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Feb 14 2001 - 22:11:16 GMT