In article <AvmdnQllz6Cqd4LanZ2dnUVZ_s2tnZ2d@giganews.com>,
"Ness_net" <richard@nomore.damn.spam.nessnet.com> wrote:

> "james g. keegan jr." <jgkeegan@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:jgkeegan-DF4159.18072224102007@individual.net...
> > In article <1193222769.961784.219840@q3g2000prf.googlegroups. com>,
> > dafydd <dafydd.ieuans@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> I have to agree, I really do not see how it matters whther one likes
> >> to top post, as I myself prefer to do, bottom post or in line post.
> >
> >
> > top-posting once defines the poster as usenet illiterate.
> >
> > top posting twice defines the poster as rude and illiterate.
> >
> > top posting more than twice defines the poster as obstinately
> > ignorant.
> >
>
> Bitching incessantly about it defines the poster as a sanctimonious asshole.

then you admit you are a "sanctimonious asshole" since you have
posted on the topic far more than i have. i agree with your self
evaluation.
>
> Labeling someone based only because of how they post is shortsighted and
> close-minded.

on the contrary, it is a response to visible events, and a fair one.

> Posting the same lame crap as the above, makes the poster a pretentious jerk.

then why did you do it? are you saying you are also a "pretentious
jerk?"

you've been labeled a hypocrite before, haven't you?

--
"New York Times has all ready sent me a response stating you have
been warned."
-- prison clerk heishman lying as "Osprey" <noneedtok...@mail.com>
in news:2rCdnZNy7LA5OojdRVn_iw@comcast.com