Replies

Why would you and others of your ilk post things so obtuse on a thread which, because of it's scientific interests, should be seen by homeschoolers and other young people who can be directed to the thread by email or instant messaging?

Why would you want to embarrass, besmirch or defame the reputation of the site in the eyes of their parents and cause conservative views which this site is supposed to evidence to be looked at with the disdain reserved for the Clintonian types?

Instead of bringing honor and respect to the site you all are intent on vesting it with a reputation suitable for a dung hill and making our host and those who appreciate the site a laughing stock among the intelligent or the beckoning byword for the porn inclined.

Please stop wreaking as much destruction as any DU disrupter and bringing as much shame to the site as Clinton has to this Nation.

Your marvelous quick wit and obvious capability with humor would be so refreshing, captivating and joy producing to so many if it reflected wisdom rather than rot. It would bring you great respect rather than disrepute.

"ilk"? cuuuuuute...

"obtuse"? "besmirch"? "defame"?
Oh, do calm down. Or be concise: "sully" would have sufficed succinctly, and been more accurate.

Some counterpoints:
1. The original article on the New Scientist website is the one which should be studied by the little rugrats, as the post here has no data.
2. Blame whoever wrote the humor-inspiring headline over at New Scientist - the puns and jests are as inevitable a byproduct of such a headline as is a nova of the fusion-to-iron stellar cycle.
3. While I will agree that Holdmuhbeer's sexual reference was inappropriate, I do so only because it skirts very close to violating the site's posting guidelines. Whether or not it actually crosses that line is a matter for the Admin Moderator to decide - not me... and not you. To attempt to do so, as you seem to have intended, in the tone and timbre you used, seems a usurpation of a mantle of authority and comes as close as the sexual reference does to violating a clause of the posting guidelines: "no personal attacks".

I normally don't rag on folks, but you ragged on all of us who like to season our awe with irreverence, and I do not believe you have just cause. Please do not do so again. You took what could have been made as a valid point and instead made it into an exercise in supercilious vainglory, causing annoyance instead of concord - let alone penitence.
(And: Yes, I can Bulwer-Lytton with the best of them).
Life is not and should not be as dour as you would seem to prefer. So, again: Do calm down.

Why would you and others of your ilk post things so obtuse on a thread which, because of it's scientific interests, should be seen by homeschoolers and other young people who can be directed to the thread by email or instant messaging? Why would you want to embarrass, besmirch or defame the reputation of the site in the eyes of their parents and cause conservative views which this site is supposed to evidence to be looked at with the disdain reserved for the Clintonian types? Instead of bringing honor and respect to the site you all are intent on vesting it with a reputation suitable for a dung hill and making our host and those who appreciate the site a laughing stock among the intelligent or the beckoning byword for the porn inclined. Please stop wreaking as much destruction as any DU disrupter and bringing as much shame to the site as Clinton has to this Nation. Your marvelous quick wit and obvious capability with humor would be so refreshing, captivating and joy producing to so many if it reflected wisdom rather than rot. It would bring you great respect rather than disrepute.

Gee aren't we a prude. Lighten up and take the corn cob out.

Why would you and others of your ilk post things so obtuse on a thread which, because of it's scientific interests, should be seen by homeschoolers and other young people who can be directed to the thread by email or instant messaging? Why would you want to embarrass, besmirch or defame the reputation of the site in the eyes of their parents and cause conservative views which this site is supposed to evidence to be looked at with the disdain reserved for the Clintonian types? Instead of bringing honor and respect to the site you all are intent on vesting it with a reputation suitable for a dung hill and making our host and those who appreciate the site a laughing stock among the intelligent or the beckoning byword for the porn inclined. Please stop wreaking as much destruction as any DU disrupter and bringing as much shame to the site as Clinton has to this Nation. Your marvelous quick wit and obvious capability with humor would be so refreshing, captivating and joy producing to so many if it reflected wisdom rather than rot. It would bring you great respect rather than disrepute.

Gee aren't we a prude. Lighten up and take the corn cob out.