Television ratings re Prison Break vs Origin, as a example of the failings of a free market system (Attn Duggy, Fran)

[Ext User(David Barnett)]

"FRAN" <fran_beta@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1151058687.331990.119260@g10g2000cwb.googlegr oups.com...

> I was listening to Jenny Spillane talking about the soccer, which she
> claimed they'd been talking about "ad nauseum". She spake a gobful.

As you just did with your double post.

Apologies - couldn't resist.
--
David Barnett

[Ext User(Duggy)]

David Barnett wrote:
> > I took him to mean "qed (quod erat demonstrandum)" but didn't see a
> > reason to get picky about it.
> As I've just apologetically posted.

Don't take it out on me, I didn't have a problem with it. It was an
error, everyone makes them, I left it as it was because pointing errors
out constant only makes it seem like you don't have a strong actual
argument to make.

I saw your Qid, figured it was QED, and ran with that. I only brought
it up because someone else did, and then only to say, "Hey, no problem"

I'm not sure why you felt you have to get so defensive about it, but I
honestly wasn't attacking you on this matter.

I know that we don't always see eye-to-eye on matters and it may seem
that I launch my own little jihads on you, but it's mainly done in jest
even if you don't see it that way.

I respect your opinion, which is why I spend so much time trying to
explain mine to you, as I'd feel better about what I believe if I knew
you did too.

I really didn't see your other apology until I read your reply to my
post, so I didn't mean to make it seem like an attack after you'd
cleared up the mistake, I really didn't.

I'd hate for something as petty as this widen the gap between us and I
am honestly sorry for any and all offence caused. Mea culpa, but it
was not done intentionally.

===
= DUG.
===

[Ext User(David Barnett)]

"Duggy" <Paul.Duggan@jcu.edu.au> wrote in message
news:1151167917.210518.20940@u72g2000cwu.googlegro ups.com...
> David Barnett wrote:
>> > I took him to mean "qed (quod erat demonstrandum)" but didn't see a
>> > reason to get picky about it.
>> As I've just apologetically posted.
>
> Don't take it out on me, I didn't have a problem with it. It was an
> error, everyone makes them, I left it as it was because pointing errors
> out constant only makes it seem like you don't have a strong actual
> argument to make.
>
> I saw your Qid, figured it was QED, and ran with that. I only brought
> it up because someone else did, and then only to say, "Hey, no problem"
>
> I'm not sure why you felt you have to get so defensive about it, but I
> honestly wasn't attacking you on this matter.
>
> I know that we don't always see eye-to-eye on matters and it may seem
> that I launch my own little jihads on you, but it's mainly done in jest
> even if you don't see it that way.
>
> I respect your opinion, which is why I spend so much time trying to
> explain mine to you, as I'd feel better about what I believe if I knew
> you did too.
>
> I really didn't see your other apology until I read your reply to my
> post, so I didn't mean to make it seem like an attack after you'd
> cleared up the mistake, I really didn't.
>
> I'd hate for something as petty as this widen the gap between us and I
> am honestly sorry for any and all offence caused. Mea culpa, but it
> was not done intentionally.

I wasn't upset with you, more upset with myself for making a silly mistake.

As for the rest of what you say, I believe you; otherwise I would have
killfiled you.
--
David Barnett

[Ext User(Emjaye T)]

David said....

> Apologies - should have been: Q.E.D. (quod erat demonstrandum).

Is that the same as Quid Pro Quo or Que Sa Deeya?