In article >,
sf > wrote:

> On Sat, 06 Mar 2010 18:59:45 -0600, Omelet >
> wrote:
>
> > In article >,
> > blake murphy > wrote:
> >
> > > >>no. a 'good person at heart' does not go out of his way to insult
> > > >>people
> > > >>just to get a rise out of them.
> > > >
> > > > What irony... that makes you the most sardonic creep here... and don't
> > > > take that literally, you don't have knees! LOL The mick is also in
> > > > the bottom 10 percentile of the usenet ignoranus pool... someone whose
> > > > only purpose for being here is bashing out his bitterness on people is
> > > > dumber than shit for advertising that he has no legs... did we really
> > > > need to visualize your freak showedness on a cooking group... NOT! You
> > > > deserve every KICK in your vulvacanized pie hole you get.
> > >
> > > there's a gut that's really nice at heart, om.
> > >
> > > blake
> >
> > 'Scuse me Blake babe, but I did NOT write that!!!
>
> Admittedly the attribution was borked, but I read it as calling your
> attention to the post.

No, the attributions were fine. Go back and look if you are interested.
Om mangled them, including taking out the part that she posted, and
Blake was responding to, although Blake did quote what she posted about
'good person at heart'.

Pretty obviously, Om is too nice a person to have written the stuff
above.

To go into "lecture" mode, I think this is part of the problem with poor
trimming of posts. People just get in the habit of ignoring what is
left in, since often much is irrelevant and unnecessary. But Blake
carefully left in what actually applied, and I suspect that Om just
skipped it. It was a little complicated, because Blake wasn't
responding to what was immediately above, or even above that, but what
was three levels above.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA