RE: Hello :)
September 29, 2011 at 5:56 pm
(This post was last modified: September 29, 2011 at 5:58 pm by Shell B.)
(September 29, 2011 at 5:54 pm)Napoleon Wrote: See how mine didn't have one? That's because it wasn't a question. DURRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR.
In that case, the structure is all wrong. Actually, it is all wrong either way, you spammy lapdog.
(September 29, 2011 at 5:55 pm)Phaedra Wrote:(September 29, 2011 at 5:49 pm)Shell B Wrote: I agree. You should use the terms "shit" and "worth looking at." Cy Twombly = shit. Sure, it's subjective. Some dogs eat shit. That doesn't change the fact that it is shit they're eating. Anyone who has an appreciation for fine art is sure to find those scribblings offensive to the very idea. No, it isn't all about aesthetics, but it has quite a bit to do with vision and talent. That charlatan has neither.
Wow...
Seriously? Are you taking Napo's reaction as a cue to how to respond to my post? It's not personal or directed at you, so why the faux offended reply in lieu of a defense of your position? Should I just pretend to agree when I do not? I swear, sometimes I feel like Beta.