Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Kane
In order to effectively answer your latest question of me:
|
My
second question, you mean?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Kane
One would need to go back and review the content of a topically unrelated post I authored on this same thread - being: post 653 - wherein I referenced Aleister Crowley, the English self-styled Ceremonial Magician (1875-1947), who co-oped the number: 666, from The Book of Revelations:13:18 - on the topic of: Accidentally Summoning a Real Demon in TFT.
666, coincidentally, also being the EXACT number of your unexpected post and question to me.
|
Actually, I lack the time to go back and search out and study the various comments you or anyone else posts to these threads in order to follow some unapparent linkage between them. My experience here has been that you either need to reference your earlier post, or to explain your reference in your current post in order to avoid misunderstandings.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Kane
Additionally, the (in)famous valediction Crowley employed when closing a correspondence was: "Polemically Sent". I found the coincidence and timing of all these things, as I wrote: "Fascinating". When asking you in reply, if you had noticed that your post was numbered as: 666, and I included the aside and reference to: "Polemically-Sent", apparently this was interpreted as a Non-Sequitur.
|
Ah. There's part of the problem. "Polemically" means "hostile" (look it up), which led me to believe that you were accusing me of being hostile by simply asking ONE question. I still suspect you were, given the sarcasm and snark of your response, but your word choice based on some obscure thing Crowley wrote definitely contributed to the nature of my response. If I overreacted to yet another unjustified seeming accusation, I apologize.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Kane
I trust the above has made everything clear for you.
|
Hardly. You failed to respond the vast bulk of my reply, so agreeing that this "made everything clear" would clearly be wrong. However it does clarify your obscure "P.S.", so there's that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Kane
However, I really must close now and secure the barn, as it seems some friendly-prankster has been diligently - though unsuccessfully - attempting to get my goat.
|
There you go again, accusing me of something I never desired or tried to do. It would be nice if you stopped attributing motives to me that simply aren't true.