No XyWrite Content (Was--Re: Conundrum)

[Nathan Thrillkiller gottlos@xxxxxxxx]

redsugar@xxxxxxxx wrote:
>
> Jeffrey G. Purvis wrote:
>
> > Robert Holmgren wrote:
>
> ≪ Here's one home-brew way that I've used to de-nun your CONUNDRUM (a
>  meaningless word, BTW). ≫
>
> > If your aside was directed at the common use of the referenced word,
> > please deign to enlighten [much snipping]: why meaningless?
>
> Surely he means, {edit} that it has no pedigree, no legitimate etymology;
> that it was artificially contrived, a long time ago, from fake Latin as a
> jest. {edit}
> He is playing with you, Mr. Bullwhacker -- errr, Purvis.

Mr. or Ms. redsugar:

Your reply was interesting and informative. In addition, if Mr. Holmgren
actually intended to communicate the etymological bastardry you
describe, he was being his usual clever self. I am sceptical, however,
that such a sophisticated and knowledgeable explanation can be
attributed to Mr. Holmgren, given that he chose to encapsulate it within
"meaningless" rather than your more elegant and accurate "contrived" and
"fake Latin."

Of course, the whole point of my post to the listserv was to tweak Mr.
Holmgren. Despite his obvious skills and the benefits they produce for
XyWrite users everywhere, I object (mildly) to the tone of petulant
superiority he sometimes adopts. He also once waxed arrogant to a more
obnoxious degree in an exchange of personal e-mail with me. So I took an
opportunity to fire a pop-gun across his battleship-bow.

Apologies to all, especially Mr. Holmgren, both for my own petulance and
for going off topic. No more Orthodox catamites (or was it concubines)
for me.

Jeffrey G. Purvis, errrr, Bullwhocker
gottlos@xxxxxxxx