Path: news.cinenet.net!out2.nntp.cais.net!in1.nntp.cais.net!news1.radix.net!saltmine.radix.net!not-for-mail From: moe@Radix.Net (Ted Frank) Newsgroups: alt.showbiz.gossip,alt.religion.kibology Subject: Re: The first unbleeped "shit" on Late Night Network TV? Date: 3 Aug 1997 23:41:53 -0400 Organization: RadixNet Internet Services, Md. USA Lines: 21 Message-ID: <5s3j21$2la@saltmine.radix.net> References: <2307FC8B3976F0D1.1FD3D0B883018782.FAC4FA71ADAE024A@library-proxy.airnews.net> <5s2qil$all$1@newsd-3.alma.webtv.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: saltmine.radix.net Xref: news.cinenet.net alt.showbiz.gossip:83654 alt.religion.kibology:35775 In article <5s2qil$all$1@newsd-3.alma.webtv.net>, Marco's Ponies wrote: >Let me humor you. Okay, you WERE being ironic. I know irony is a big >leap for someone of your diminished capabilities, but next time you >might want to "be precise to avoid ambigutiy" by signaling that irony is >INTENDED. Writers usually put ironically intended words in quotations, >for example. Writers usually put quotations in quotation marks. They put ironic remarks in blue ink. Charles Dickens was rarely ironic, so there's very little blue colouring in his work. Jonathan Swift, however, is rarely anything but, which is why his books are often so much more expensive. -- moe@radix.net http://www.radix.net/~moe "Basically, what you're doing is using argumentum ad ignorantium, and I must admit that you seem to have a more than adequate supply of ignorance to which to apply that fallacy." -- Carl Lydick, 4/2/96, R.I.P.