The big shots

[Grant Edwards]

On 2008-02-19, castironpi at gmail.com <castironpi at gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm going to start marking my subjective comments with a star,
> so it's clear what is emperically verifiable, and what is not.
>
> It's a bad sign.

I've no idea what "it" refers to in the sentence above.

> If you aren't keeping your thoughts to yourself, and thrashing
> about the world for a peer, a social network, a support group,
> or a community, then you missed the day in grammar school when
> they were handing out smiles.  But they're not handing them
> out anymore.

To me, that appears to be a completely random homile, appropos
of nothing.  Even as a homily, it doesn't really make any
sense.

> Even on my emperical claims, I'm wrong 90% of the time.  On
> the subjective ones, I'm not only wrong that much, but no one
> else want to hear, or even can verify them.  Smell's fine to
> me.
>
> Emotions are prejudiced; and even in my own concrete thoughts,
> I will misidentify myself with another, and others with me.
> When I say "I", I mean "you."

I've no idea what your point is.  I guess you're trying to
explain why your posts appear to be semi-random nonsense?

> French and Spanish have impersonal pronouns: "on" and "se",
> respectively.  In English, they often come out as, "we",
> "they", and "you" a lot, on occasion a "one", and sometimes,
> even, I.

Perhaps you need somebody who's fluent in English to help you
proofread your posts?  Or help you tune the Eliza program
you're using to generate them?

-- 
Grant Edwards                   grante             Yow! I'm encased in the
                                  at               lining of a pure pork
                               visi.com            sausage!!