On Thu, 22 Mar 2012 07:12:19 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Thu, 22 Mar 2012 03:05:20 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Wed, 21 Mar 2012 15:53:54 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Wed, 21 Mar 2012 16:56:12 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Wed, 21 Mar 2012 16:37:15 -0400, "Tom Del Rosso"
wrote:


John Fields wrote:

Knowing why he responded the way he did, had you then replied that you
meant him no slight with your first post, a lot of ugliness might have
been averted.

You insult somebody's college, then he insults your wife, and then you're
supposed to explain you didn't mean it? You can't be serious.

---
Sure, why not?

Larkin said he was only fooling around, so if Jim took it wrong and
flamed back hard, Larkin could easily have defused the situation - at
very little cost to himself - by explaining that he was only fooling
around.

I wasn't fooling around. I was commenting on the huge numbers of
press-release scientific-breakthrough cures-cancer types of idiotic
press releases that MIT generates. That never amount to anything.

This sort of thing, over and over:

http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/1...n-every-gadget

---
Your: "My "feud" with JT began when I made fun of a goofy "scientific
breakthrough" press release from MIT, with no reference to JT. His
alma mater is apparently sacred to him, and he took it as a personal
insult. He responded by saying obscene and obviously untrue things
about my wife."

doesn't explain why, if you knew of Jim's affection for MIT and that
he'd take the insult personally, you didn't couch your post in a tone
more conducive to criticizing rationally instead of belittling by
making fun of.

If he is proud of these silly MIT press releases, he is indeed getting
senile.

---
Whether he's proud of them or not isn't the point; the fact that his
fondness for MIT makes him rankle at someone who makes fun of his alma
mater just for meanness is.

--
JF