Lies about CI's

Status
Not open for further replies.
jillio said:
And there you go again. Your second sentence negates any sincerity in the first or the third.
Click to expand...

Gold star, again! So glad you understood.
 
jillio said:
There is no such classification on the continuum as "very profoundly deaf". And yes, there are those who are profoundly deaf who converse over the phone. And many do it in text.:lol:
Click to expand...

Dang, I use the vp a lot too. I must be weird.
 
GrendelQ said:
Gold star, again! So glad you understood.
Click to expand...

Thank you. But the misunderstanding, quite oviously, is not mine. It is okay. Give yourself time. It is a learning process. Understanding of the topic cannot be developed in a short year or two.:wave:
 
"common" pattern -- what majority thinks is best, we have no choice but to follow that pattern. No matter how far this argument can go, including personally attacking each other, how one can be interpreted or what that might be, we have to mainstream the borg's society, the PERFECT world.

I'm out of here.
 
GrendelQ said:
Gold star, again! So glad you understood.
Click to expand...
your first two words were overshadowed by the negation of the lack of enthusiasm in the 5th word. The comma after the word star just pisses me off. Don't know why but it just does. :rofl:
 
LinuxGold said:
"common" pattern -- what majority thinks is best, we have no choice but to follow that pattern. No matter how far this argument can go, including personally attacking each other, how one can be interpreted or what that might be, we have to mainstream the borg's society, the PERFECT world.

I'm out of here.
Click to expand...

Well said. And in this case, the deaf will mainstreamed to the deaf's society. It was in the past and it will be in the future.
 
rockdrummer said:
your first two words were overshadowed by the negation of the lack of enthusiasm in the 5th word. The comma after the word star just pisses me off. Don't know why but it just does. :rofl:
Click to expand...

Because it is grammatically incorrect. And from a hearie, no less!
 
deafgal001 said:
I did have a static electrity situation so don't mock it. Now I've never heard gas explosion as CI do not cause static electricity.
Click to expand...

Just in case my lighthearted response to you came off as too flip, Deafgal (which it was), I want you to know that I am wholly unfamiliar with your static electricity situation. My comment had nothing to do with you (as you can see by the quoted comment I was responding to). I'm not sure why, given that there's been a string of static-related "lies" posted in a similar vein, my response to one of these in particular upset you, but I am sorry (sincerely) if I did tap into something sad -- it was not done intentionally or with you in mind.
 
jillio said:
Because it is grammatically incorrect. And from a hearie, no less!
Click to expand...

Says the woman who couldn't find any reference to "acquisistion" in RD's quoted wiki post because some goofball had written it as "acquisition". :laugh2:
 
I do sincerely hope that dyslexic fingers know what they are doing for self-pleasure.

*ahem* *hides*
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top