.... his works don't taste good! Not him! But besides that....I was pointing out the fact that you used style and feelings seperately...
And the truth of the matter is that you didn't think that Thoreau tasted good. At this time I think that you probably are right about his flavor, but I think that his writing was excellent in its effects.
previously quoted by you: "I can think of a lewd way to demonstrate what I wrote. Taste is closely relted to feelings, so much so that they become indistinguishable." And yet, you later on you distinguished a difference between the two by acknowledging both...if you thought they were different, you would have only used one! Ha! And you agreed with me when I said this... "Like I con't care for Thoreau...well then. I understand. Blake isn't part of your style. So your feelings toward him are uninterested?" heehee. Look at the evidence! As for the other...well...what were we trying to prove? We both were trying to get our insights clear, right? I was still right, but your personal opinions were still right...so ...we both won that round?
And I see you don't understand that it was I who was in the right...oh right...it's not that that you don't understand...you're just in denial!
So I got you to change your mind without you noticing, and now you're claiming that it never happened. O.K., whatever.
Well then...your conclusions are wrong.
That wasn't a guess.
eh....nope. Guess Again!
You persuaded me to persuade you that you agree with me.
I kinda thought I was getting you to see my side of things. Huh...so who's persuaded who?
