Subject: Re: THE REAL GERRY ARMSTRONG (repost)
Date: 15 Nov 2002 23:06:41 -0800
References: <firstname.lastname@example.org> <TS8GQREN37575.email@example.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1037430401 25122 127.0.0.1 (16 Nov 2002 07:06:41 GMT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: 16 Nov 2002 07:06:41 GMT
"Gandalf" <BasicQuestions@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<jubB9.firstname.lastname@example.org>...
> "Gerry Armstrong"
<email@example.com> wrote in message
> > On 15 Nov 2002 16:02:04 -0000, Pookiebelle <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> > >Gerry's really kooking out now. You've proved your point. Now please
> > >stop or else you will look just as kooky as him.
> I thank you for your sage advice. Nonetheless, I'd already stuck my foot
> far up my mouth to dislodge it other than by carrying through.
> Each of the following post analyses have a subjective AG Score: "About
> Score" which is 0 or 1. Zero if the post was not primarily about Gerry,
> it was.
> In summary, my analysis showed that I was wrong in claiming that Gerry
> primarily posts about Gerry. A few posts are Gerry about Gerry, but far
> fewer than I had originally thought or claimed. I went back enough posts
> conclude that the evidence was overwhelmingly against me and further
> analysis would just be tedious repetition.
> While I very much dislike being wrong, this is a nice conclusion in a way:
> 'd prefer being wrong about another critic's limitations than right.
> Therefore, I formally apologize to you Gerry and retract my prior negative
> statements about "you almost always posting about yourself." It
> mistake and I stand corrected.
> Sincerely sorry [and, with a little luck, I'll be right next time :)],
And don't you forget it,
Gandalf...because I guarantee you that Gerry
never will...and will jump to the occasion to use your apology as a
weapon against you next time you cross hairs with the kook.