"On The Highways and Bi-Ways God Built"
Yahoo.com> wrote in
message news:f903tr01qql@drn.newsguy.com...> In article
comcast.com>, Tom says...>>
>>
>>That's correct. It's jargon peculiar to those who study a specific sort
>>of
>>occultism. This is clearly only a small number of people. Jargon is
>>conversational shorthand with a very narrow meaning that is not entirely
>>congruent with the same term in common parlance. Every specialized field
>>of
>>study develops some. For instance, physicists use the term "color" and
>>"spin" in ways that are quite different from the meaning of those terms
>>used
>>by "the rest of the King's English speaking world". Do you find that just
>>as amusing?
>
> but scientists and others in specialized fields don't feel the need to
> misspell
> the words they use as jargon, like those in the Magic field, whatever that
> is.
Again you display your indomitable ignorance and sheep-like conformity to
whatever the herd behavior happens to be at the moment. An archaic spelling
is not a misspelling. It's simply a spelling that's no longer popular.
That makes it perfect for an item of jargon in a field in which archaic
language is of great interest. But I wouldn;t expect you to know that or to
care if you did. You're too busy making sure your nose is firmly planted in
the ass ahead of you.
> because i don't believe i'm going out on a limb by saying that the
> majority of
> people who do "magic," Penn and Teller, people you see at Magic shows
> spell the
> word "magic" with a K. do you see?
That's because they are not part of the small group already described which
uses that jargon.
>>You have some pretty naive categories for people. Are you really that
>>stupid or is it just an act?
>
> calling me stupid only weakens your argument,
I asked you, not called you. Perhaps you are only acting too stupid to
recognize the difference, but, as the evidence of your inability to think
clearly mounts, that conclusion appears less likely.
> an argument i will eventually win
> by the way,
And how will you know you've won? What criteria will you use to decide when
that has happened?
> by and large, many of the people i've seen within the usenet world who use
> the
> world "magick" seem to be of that ilk,
How many, exactly? Was your sample size large enough to justify the
generalization to the whole population in question? Where's the raw data?
Or are you just making an unverifiable claim, sort of like those "black ops"
paranoids? The more you carry on, the more you look like a person suffering
from an overactive imagination and a lack of critical thinking skills or
like someone talking out of his ass. Let's see your evidence. No
unverifiable anecdotes, now. You wouldn't want to use nothing but the same
sort of "evidence" the kooks use.
> the kind that believe ridiculous ideas,
> like the US Government is responsible for the destruction of the World
> Trade
> Center, the movie JFK is actually real, space aliens are abducting people
> every
> day...you know, just silly and ridiculous ideas.
Like the silly and ridiculous idea that everyone who uses the term "magick"
must be a paranoid conspiracy theorist. You know, that kind.
> hence my comments in my previous post. why not just use the word "magic?"
Hence my answer which you seem to either have ignored or utterly failed to
comprehend.
> you
> have every right in the world to believe in any silly and ridiculous idea
> you
> wish to believe in, but does that give you license to misspell words for
> the
> sake of some pretentious emotion?
Does one need a license to use alternate spellings, sheep-boy? Show me the
law demanding such a license and where you think one obtains it. The more
you write, the less likely it appears that your stupidity is an act.
>>Like I say, it's ignorance that's
>>necessary for our appreciation of magic, or magick.
>
> wouldn't we appreciate it more if we spelled it correctly?
I wonder what it's like to be unable to appreciate something because the
label on its package isn't spelled to your liking. Heh.
>>> anyway, spelling magic with a "k" sort of reminds me of when i was 10,
>>> and
>>> a kid
>>> on our block named Brian insisted to all of us who ran around with him
>>> now
>>> spell
>>> his name "Bryan" instead of Brian.
>>
>>Did anybody think to ask him why? I bet that never even occurred to any
>>of
>>you little dickheads.
>
> see, using the term "dickhead" clearly shows a lack of imagination on your
> part.
I didn't misspell it, did I? I know how terribly that upsets you to
encounter a word that doesn't conform to your schoolboy expectations. Or
was it just that it was a vulgarism that polite little boys like you are
taught not to say?
> but we did actually ask him this. and he insisted that "Bryan" looked
> cooler
> when written down then "Brian."
Sure you did... Well, even if I thought you weren't just making that up, I
bet you never thought to ask why he thought it looked cooler.
> the rest of us thought this was most hilarious.
Of course you did. Laughter is a form of social punishment used by
dickheads (there's that awful word again!) to enforce conformity and
reassure each other that the person who frightened you with unorthodoxy
isn't really all that dangerous to you.
>>Most folks have the ability to envision the spelling of people's names in
>>all their varying glory, unless, of course, they're illiterate.
>
> whoa, there, Majiq Man,
Now didn't you just tell me that you believe that calling names weakens your
arguments and shows a lack of imagination? That would indicate that you
believe yourself to have weak arguments and a lack of imagination. It does
seem likely, at that.
> coming from a person who thinks it's just fine to
> misspell words on a silly whim, i wouldn't be so quick to call anyone else
> illiterate.
That's because, being illiterate, you don't know an archaic spelling from a
misspelling.
>>Were you and your brother were both illiterate?
>
> this coming from a man who misspells the word "magic" on purpose? heh...
> you
> have to admit, that was pretty good on my part.
A pretty good revelation of your illiteracy, yes.
>>Or were you just so frightened of
>>the fact that someone was acting in a way you didn't understand that you
>>simply responded with hostility?
>
> Madgiqal Man, we did not beat him with sticks, then banish him to the
> furthest
> ends of the earth. we laughed at him and then went and played basketball.
And if you had slapped him around for it, you could always claim you didn't
actually kill him. It doesn't matter that you didn't summarily execute him,
you did indeed punish him for displaying a harmless variation from your
sacred conformity, dickhead. The severity of the punishment is not at
issue.
> if there's anyone here displaying hostility, it would be you.
Nobody's beating you with sticks, so, according to you, it can't possibly be
hostility. And perhaps you don't recall your hostilely derisive comments
that prompted my response. You are *so* easy to bust. Even your weaseling
is clumsy.
