MACVSOG68 to Zon: Posters such as you are a dime a dozen. I see them on threads where their response to a well thought out post was to criticize the failure to use spell check, or some other meaningless error having nothing at all to do with the thread. 111 MACVSOG68: No offense, but Knight is spelled with a "K". 217
Since your entire sequence of posts was nothing but criticisms of my "accuracy", I responded in kind. And if you notice, I said "well thought out post". Your posts were anything but. You have yet to even touch on the subject of the thread. It seems you can dish it out, but cannot take it. The numerous mistakes you have made in your posts do not put you in much of a position to criticize anyone else.
If high school is not treating you well, go see a counselor. It's ok to hang around with those more intelligent than you, but use that opportunity to learn, not to demonstrate your immature jealousy.
MACVSOG68 to Zon: Posters such as you are a dime a dozen. I see them on threads where their response to a well thought out post was to criticize the failure to use spell check, or some other meaningless error having nothing at all to do with the thread. 111, 219 and 226
And if you notice, I said "well thought out post". Your posts were anything but.
You're obfuscating. As though Alan Keyes, the author of the article that this thread is about, which in your esteemed intellectual capacity you completely missed. Nor did you have the "tad bit of logic"65 to use the find function on your Web browser to locate how Alan Keyes was entered into the discussion. You wrote, How did Keyes get into this discussion? 68 -- Since I didn't criticize your spelling you can only mean that you thought I criticized "some other meaningless error having nothing at all to do with the thread." But Alan Keyes has very much to do with this thread.
In the red quote above you refer to two parties/persons. 1), a critic, and 2) person being criticized. In short, Zon criticized your post. Zon is person #1 and you are person #2.
Then you infer to Philman_36 that in your well thought out post to him you criticized his spelling. Thus, in your post to Philman_36 you referred to yourself as both person #1 and person #2. You wrote to Philman_36, "I think you forgot the part about the response to a well thought out post." 220 I suppose to your way of thinking (deceiving) that' it's okay to criticize spelling so long as the post that contains the spelling error isn't a well thought out post.
You boasted about "bottom feeders" (your words) who resort to criticizing other people's spelling errors. Then, you turn around and criticize other people's spelling errors.
I can continue, as I have, to unravel your deceptions for as long as you keep making them.