What ever gave you the idea that you hurt myfeelings. This is an example of you judging others by yourself. I stated that your OT posts are a waste of time, thus indicated with the previously defind variable "G" (garbage or graffitti, or whatever). I merely implied that if you can´t dealwith the thread topic, or the subject of my posts to which you are pretending to respond, why post to me at all if all you are going to get as a response is the usual "G". 

G=G+1

anybody who confuses garbage with graffiti is obviously more than G=G+1

RGoss99 said:

why post to me at all if all you are going to get as a response is the usual "G". 

Some of us decided this was unnecessarily hard work a long time ago.

Oh BerrySteph, as Marid would say in an Effinger novel, "You so right".

I didn't even know that he was one to ignore, and not argue with. Thought that there was something there that had a sense of meaning and compassion, but I was deluded, again.

So why are you still posting unrequested posts still -- slow learning curve I guess.

G=G+1

G=G+1 not confused, in this case both apply. call it whatever you like junk mail either way.

That was a very, very long explanation.

No ad hominem responses.  That's pretty much all I could take from it, sorry.

That's on my start page as a rule, anyway.

On that we agree.

But I once got a G=G+1 for teasing you about a post that contained atrocious spelling.  I mean REALLY bad, not just the odd word, but almost every one. 

So, sometimes your macro can be a tad sensitive to what it perceives as an "ad hom" (i.e.: attack the argument, not the person), and the G=G+1 response ends up turning light banter into insult, where none was intended.

RGoss99 said:

If you object to the criteria I use, why be a passive-aggressive coward

G=G+1

Attack the argument, not the person.  No ad homs, please.

I get the bad spelling comment often. No, excuse, but several reasons. First I don´t care, type stream of conscious, and don´t bother to edit. Secondly as a very fast touch typist, who neither looks at the keys, nor the CRT (poor eye sight and focus result of a stroke), Third point is because I often work in several languages, my typing often reflects a different language (constitució) or phonetic (two, too, to). I have no problema with legit complaints when my errors interfere with the message of my post. However do object when my message is obvious, and the spelling-grammar complaint are merely a way for the respondent to negate the message, or avoid responding.

Not valid, my ad hom was a response to and ad hom, e.g. valid.