[Jenn[_2_]]

In article
,
Glanbrok wrote:

On Mar 7, 1:33*pm, Jenn wrote:

Clearly, you're brain dead.

*Intellectually weak spam noted.

I know. *Why do you think he posted it?

Sometimes ignoring Witless exacts a price. I almost missed this gem:

"Intellectually weak spam noted."

Only a genius like Scottie could conceive of rating "spam" on the
strength of its "intellectual" fortitude.

BTW, Jenn, how many times have you sworn off trying to have a Normal
discussion with Witlessmongrel? You'd get more satisfaction from
posting links to musical performances you hate than trying to exact a
reasoned response from Yapper.

A long time ago, the Resistance embraced the strategy of offering the
Krooborg nothing but mockery, ridicule, and insults. This strategy had
zero effect on the Beast's posting behavior, but it saved a lot of
time and keystrokes. I humbly suggest that the same strategy is
equally appropriate for dealing with duh-Scottie. It's absolutely
clear that Witless has no interest beyond constant, pointless arguing.
(Some have theorized that Terrierdork's behavior on Usenet is a
transference of the resentment he feels at being treated like dirt by
his nominal wife. If that thought gives you pause, out of compassion
or risibility, then I suggest the best course is simply to ignore
Witless completely.)

I ignore him sometimes. Other times I fall for his spam and trolling.
It's now easy to see the fact that he ignored what I replied to in the
first place on 2/7. If it's "spam" that he agrees with, no problem.