On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 17:45, A. Pagaltzis wrote:
* s swami <sns(a)paradise.net.nz> [2005-04-27 06:10]:
The last time an Olivarian thread surfaced it took Aristotle a Debian release cycle to recover. IIRC, 'The Craig' pointed out, in jest, that the lug didn't claim logical consistency in its conversations - or something like that. Now he will need to give temporal consistency the boot as well.
Loving it ;-)
Okay, I read this six times, and it still doesn’t make any sense. Confutalations, Sid. :-)
On a second reading, I hardly understand it myself! It was my pathetic attempt at humour. I'll try to parse it: 1) An Olivarian thread requires the involvement of the esteemed Oliver Jones. Only he seems to have the knack of making a thread his own (perhaps in his own image). One may liken it to a QWAN [1] and many of us wluggers secretly do covet it. 2) "The Craig" refers to Craig (long suffering secretary). 3) "he" in the last sentence of my paragraph refers to Craig (not you). The last time a genuine Olivarian thread surfaced, it caused you some dismay as you show in the 4th paragraph from the /bottom/: http://list.waikato.ac.nz/pipermail/wlug/2004-June/005155.html To which Craig replied (very roughly along the lines I mentioned) as the next message in the thread. 4) We've missed you on the list of late so I mischeviously connected your absence to the violence to which your delicate sensibilities were exposed in named thread. Not the case of course! This was all in jest and the man himself sits back shaking his head at our attempts to plumb the depths of Olivarian QWAN :) Anyway this and my previous mail should get the crap-of-the-month award. [1] For those who might not have come across QWAN: "Quality Without A Name" as used in the "patterns" community. Cheers and apologies Sid. -- prophet of no things Olivarian