On Tue, 5 Feb 2008 09:17:51 -0800, "SteveB"
wrote:
I really think that what you said you read that you didn't really read what
the other person had said. Had you read what the other person had said,
then you would and could not say that you thought what they had said was
what they actually meant to say, but that you inferred into what you read
what they said was not really what they said at all. And then there's
the chance that what they said was actually what they said and you missed it
entirely or that you did not allow a difference of opinion of what they said
from any opinion other than your own. And as for what you say, I am never
sure of what you said, and even when I read what you said, I can see it's
what you said, but I am never sure that you intended to say what you said
because you change what you say about what you said so many times. So,
please just say what you say, and what you said about what you said, and let
other people say what they say without the need to correct what they said,
or your perception or imperception of what they actually said. And take
into account that what they said is not actually what they meant to say and
that what you heard them say is only what you meant to hear and not what
they intended to say, but only what you wanted to hear.

It just doesn't get any clearer than that, you blockhead.

Steve


(BFG)

I once had a recalcitrant individual say a few things to me.

I asked him what he said; the reply was, "I said what I said and
I'll, say it again!!".

I said to him, say it again, so I understand.


Oren
--