Well, this is the Flame board, after all. I was feeling a little left out, after posting a mild-mannered message that drew no replies, and all the action was genuine flaming on other branches.
Remember that Tom and I have been arguing for years. The reference to Adam Smith was an allusion to a discussion in the summer of 2001 (seems like another era, doesn't it?) about economics. I'd just slogged through The Wealth of Nations, and slog is the operative word: Tom could have taught Adam Smith a lot about brevity. That's when Tom admitted that he'd never read it (or maybe it was so long ago that it had faded from memory), and I teased him about it.
Basically, it was an inside joke ham-handedly leavened with a desire to flame about something...anything.
--Robert
Flame » in reply to an astonishing little threadlet...
Re: an astonishing little threadlet...
The whole thread (55 posts)
- God, I'm getting tired of this...
- Testing....
- Moi aussi
- I want some brownie points for restraint. n/t (n/t)
- Oh put it away, Tom, Nobody is impressed...
- Then don't do this
- Maybe as an exercise I should try writing like you for a week.
- P.S.
- You just keep digging yourself deeper
- Well for Goodness' Sake
- Thanks...one Bowser was enough.
- Mary Anne, your version is PRICELESS!
- For Tom: a bit about your character (probably not what you think)
- Cripes! Don't forget you're not getting paid for this! ;-) *(n/t) (n/t)
- P.S.
- Ego deflating is a risky business Tom...