Stop capitalizing “Dal” as “DAL”

Hello Once Again to Everybody in the Underclass!

Well, Winklebottom, it didn’t take a genius to realize that you made a horrible mistake in “Stop capitalizing ‘Dal'” since it isn’t an acronym. Your “mistake,” of course, does not refer to the your claim but rather to the use of the word “acronym.” Didn’t you realize that this would enrage the Underclass? “Acronym” is AN UNUSUAL WORD in their stunted vocabularies and deserving, as a consequence, of their undiluted scorn. This characteristic, as I have said before, is definitive of the Underclass in Halifax.

So, “The Cretin” (aka Hugo Phrost) comes on with a list of proper nouns each containing three words beginning with – wait for it, D, A, and L. The Cretin doesn’t realize that “Dal” is not a contraction of a three-word proper noun and his observation, as usual, is therefore incoherent.

“Bro Tim,” in his usual sublime fashion, asks “You mean it doesn’t stand for Douches and Losers?” Bro Tim, you wouldn’t know anything about Dal, now or ever. You’re dim, Bro Tim.

Donkey, another intellectual in the Bro Tim style, observes that they don’t put the dots on Dal sweaters. No, Donkey, they don’t, but Winklebottom was talking about written prose, something in respect to which you are obviously a stranger.

Life Sucks blurts out incoherently, “dal/DAL, as in university?” One must understand, Winklebottom, is that Sucks is barely literate, a bottom-feeder in the Halifax Underclass. The word “Dal” appears to Sucks in the Underclass like a new fence appears to a cow in the pasture.

Somebody – More? – offers another penetrating observation to the effect that Dal “still stands for Douchebags and Losers.” Isn’t that profound? Isn’t it wonderful? My God, More, you’ve done yourself proud this time! Congratulations!

You could see this one coming, Winklebottom. Come onto the Comments yourself and kick some ass.

Cheerio!

Well, Hello Again to all my Friends in the Underclass.

Maude, are you listening? I’ve got a few for you regarding your “Mystery Inc” posting of Sept 16. You seem to be asleep at the switch.

: ralman writes, “Oh shut up Mr. Cato.” What about that, Maude?

: paingirl asks, “Don’t you have a funny name for me, MM?” Yes, Paingirl, I do. It’s “Stella.” Why? Because your pseudonym suggests a certain sado-masochistic turn of mind, i.e., inflicting pain on your, um, partners such as the Appalling Buffoon. Arrange a rendevous with him at the Duck Pond in the Gardens. He can can arrive wearing spats, a monocle, and carrying a folded copy of “Suddeutche Zeitung” under his left arm. You can arrive in your leathers, carrying a whip.
Give him three of the best on his withered buttocks!

Dim Bro Tim comes on claiming that “At least when I got my education, I was being paid thousands of dollars and got a career out of it.” I know, Dim, I know. Pimping pays very well these days.

: The Cretin (aka Hugo Phurst) gives my pseudonym on another site (are you listening Maude?) and quotes Bertrand Russell at me little realizing, of course, that I’ve forgottem more Russell than he’ll ever read (or understand).

: More (see ralman and The Cretin above – are you listening Maude?) calls me “an overblown twat,” little realizing he’s just an overblown twit.

:The Braying Ass (aka Donkey) delivers another intellectual bombshell writing “MM there are no words.” Yes, Donkey, for you we know that, we know that. What’s more, there never will be.

: Finally, The Cretin (aka Hugo Phurst) is back, apologizing to Maude (and rightly so – see ralman, himself and More above) and writing that his parents “taught me to respect my elders.” They should also have taught you to respect your betters, you berk.

Well, that should do it for Winklebottom. A pity he didn’t accept my invitation to come over onto the Comments and kick some Underclass ass.

Cheerio!

Hello Once Again to All My Friends in the Underclass and, of course, thank you once again for your kind thoughts and good wishes.

Dear, dear, will they never give up? Don’t they realize that they are in over their heads, out of their depth? Oh well, once more into the breach, dear friends!

: The Pitiful Berk (aka ZZZ) opens with a standard francophobe comment: “Go all Canadian Pie and pound those curds.” A lot of thought in that one, you berk. God, will he never give up?

: The Braying Ass (aka Donkey) returns with the penetrating (no pun intended) comment, “LOL, this dude’s a total douche nozzle.” I see you have given considerable thought to the douche’s construction, Ass, but now it’s time to try and raise your sights. P.S. I don’t read Charlie Brown, you douche nozzle.

: Stella (aka Paingirl) speaks about her *insert* but really, Stella, is this the place? Do try and control your phantasy life.

: The Pimp (aka Dim Bro Tim) is back making his usual inane remarks. After offering his love to Maude – reject his advances, Maude – he observes, “MM you seem to have a hooker fetish.” Pimp, I would never think of intruding on your line of work.

: The Cretin (aka Hugo Phurst) proceeds to dig another incoherent philosophical hole for himself, parroting someone to the effect that “A requirement for a belief to be epistemically virtuous, we were told, is that it is voluntary in some sense, and the right sense of ‘voluntary’ is one that allows for the formation of epistemically virtuous beliefs.” Not a bad try, Cretin, but you’re confusing philosophical categories. Instead of “epistemically virtuous beliefs” it should be “ethically virtuous beliefs.” The first relates to epistemology (the study of the justification of knowledge claims) while the latter relates to the study of virtuous action, whether derived from deontological (i.e., first) principles or appealing to pragmatic or consequentialist outcomes. There is no necessary relationship between the two. But not a bad try, Cretin. You’re beginning to show promise, but you’ve got a long way to go.

: I’m glad that More is looking forward to my response to his and his fellow bitchers. It shows that More is beginning to exercise basic self-reflective activity, the first step to philosophical enlightenment. But More, I’m not “trying to change sex’s” (sic) as you so eloquently put it. “Annie” happens to be a pseudonym I use on another site. This might be confusing for you, More, but try and concentrate.

: The Cretin (aka Hugo Phrost) appears to have been bitten by the philosophical bug. He’s back, giving what he takes to be a humourous distinction between the Solipsist and the Existentialist. His efforts, of course, are feeble but, to be positive, there does seem to be a faint spark of intelectual curiosity. There may be hope for you yet.

Well, Cheerio for now. See you on another thread!

Only two members of the Underclass still standing!
I think we’re nearing the end of the tunnel, chaps!

: “Tired” Donkey apparently has shot his bolt. I attribute his fatigue less to the intellectual rigours of my inimitable posts – well, maybe in his case – but more to his exploits in the barnyard where his unnatural congress with its inhabitants has resulted in intellectual collapse. If nothing else, Donkey has given new meaning to the phrase “animal husbandry.”

: Balls is back but appears confused. Two points: (1) Unlike “Nobody” who made an uncalled-for and out-of-context reference to her academic prowess with the intent to intimidate the readers and for which I had to rap her knuckles – maybe I should have pulled her panties down – I was not thumping my chest but rather simply replying in a factual manner to a point raised by jonnoman, i.e., that it was unnecessary for me to use the meagre sweepings of the Underclass as fodder my own thesis since I had already completed three of an incomparably more substantial and sophisticated nature. (2) As I recall, it was you who used the term “persona” – I don’t remember “cover” at all – which I proceeded to employ in my usual brilliant fashion as a springboard, so to speak, for a brief philosophical reflection on the nature of “self” which, as with so must else that I have written on this site, was insightful, sensitive, and profoundly revealing. So your question as to how much of my dissecting is of persona/acting – I take this to mean how much is genuinely mine and not a matter of my persona or acting – is answered easily. None. I never trifle with matters of philosophical concern. Never. Well, maybe sometimes. But anyway Balls,, thanks for your thoughts. Nice hearing from you again.

Cheerio!