Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.35mm (More info?)
Mike Henley wrote:
> eawckyegcy@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>> Say ... from which context-free grammar generator did you obtain that
>> output?
>
> This output: "[...]"?
>
> I don't recall obtaining that output. 😛
>
> Would you like to point out precisely what you're talking about?
I want to share with you a very deep concern I have about Mike Henley.
But first, let me pose you a question: Is Henley actually concerned
about any of us, or does he just want to take credit for others'
accomplishments? After reading this letter, you'll sincerely find it's
the latter. This march into illaudable propagandism is not happening by
mere chance. It is not, as many intrusive polemics insist, the result
of the natural, inevitable course of things. It is happening as a
direct result of Henley's prissy anecdotes. Worst of all, our
children's children would never forgive us for letting him use terms of
opprobrium such as "negligent fast-buck artists" and "amoral
extremists" to castigate whomever he opposes. I just want to say that
even when he isn't lying, he's using facts, emphasizing facts, bearing
down on facts, sliding off facts, quietly ignoring facts, and, above
all, interpreting facts in a way that will enable him to detach
individuals from traditional sources of strength and identity --
family, class, private associations.
I have taken the liberty of letting Henley know that if one dares to
criticize even a single tenet of his cock-and-bull stories, one is
promptly condemned as mad, silly, vindictive, or whatever epithet he
deems most appropriate, usually without much explanation. He insists
that honor counts for nothing. This is a rather strong notion from
someone who knows so little about the subject.
Particularly telling is the way that Henley is absolutely determined to
believe that the majority of treasonous geeks are heroes, if not
saints, and he's not about to let facts or reason get in his way. He
doesn't have any principles, or if he does, he puts them aside whenever
they're inconvenient. Just to add a little more perspective, if you
want to hide something from him, you just have to put it in a book.
Henley is terrified that there might be an absolute reality outside
himself, a reality that is what it is, regardless of his wishes,
theories, hopes, daydreams, or decrees. Let me leave you with one last
thought: I indeed have no sympathy for Mike Henley.
Mike Henley wrote:
> eawckyegcy@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>> Say ... from which context-free grammar generator did you obtain that
>> output?
>
> This output: "[...]"?
>
> I don't recall obtaining that output. 😛
>
> Would you like to point out precisely what you're talking about?
I want to share with you a very deep concern I have about Mike Henley.
But first, let me pose you a question: Is Henley actually concerned
about any of us, or does he just want to take credit for others'
accomplishments? After reading this letter, you'll sincerely find it's
the latter. This march into illaudable propagandism is not happening by
mere chance. It is not, as many intrusive polemics insist, the result
of the natural, inevitable course of things. It is happening as a
direct result of Henley's prissy anecdotes. Worst of all, our
children's children would never forgive us for letting him use terms of
opprobrium such as "negligent fast-buck artists" and "amoral
extremists" to castigate whomever he opposes. I just want to say that
even when he isn't lying, he's using facts, emphasizing facts, bearing
down on facts, sliding off facts, quietly ignoring facts, and, above
all, interpreting facts in a way that will enable him to detach
individuals from traditional sources of strength and identity --
family, class, private associations.
I have taken the liberty of letting Henley know that if one dares to
criticize even a single tenet of his cock-and-bull stories, one is
promptly condemned as mad, silly, vindictive, or whatever epithet he
deems most appropriate, usually without much explanation. He insists
that honor counts for nothing. This is a rather strong notion from
someone who knows so little about the subject.
Particularly telling is the way that Henley is absolutely determined to
believe that the majority of treasonous geeks are heroes, if not
saints, and he's not about to let facts or reason get in his way. He
doesn't have any principles, or if he does, he puts them aside whenever
they're inconvenient. Just to add a little more perspective, if you
want to hide something from him, you just have to put it in a book.
Henley is terrified that there might be an absolute reality outside
himself, a reality that is what it is, regardless of his wishes,
theories, hopes, daydreams, or decrees. Let me leave you with one last
thought: I indeed have no sympathy for Mike Henley.
/www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsyscharter.htm
Facebook
Twitter