In alt.support.diabetes Alan wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Feb 2007 03:59:32 GMT, Wes Groleau
> > wrote:

>>Sometimes there are posts here that I just don't have
>>the energy to decipher. So I skip them. It's not like
>>I'm losing much with 300-500 more posts to choose from.

[snip]

>>Anyway, the one you are complaining about was NOT
>>one of those.

> Yes it was. Perhaps you missed that part of the thread.

> In fact, I _would_ like do know what it was about.

So why on earth didn't you ask?

> But I'm
> so irritated that one of the few posts that might have been
> interesting and informative to me was so deliberately opaque
> that it might have been in code.

Aha! So that's the reason for your complaints! It wasn't the
scientific terminology. It was the fact that the OP was deliberately
using scientific terminology so you wouldn't be able to understand.

What a *******! No wonder you got so annoyed!

--
Chris Malcolm DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]