O/T The Guardian newspaper

[Andy_Faber]

while you were away things were a great deal less acrimonious.
.

Lol

[Trickytreesreds]

Lol

x 2

[ramAnag]

x 2

Wow...and to think I was called the ‘inevitable coda’! As for my ‘paranoia’...how can it be paranoia when you actually named me in your ‘pilot’ reference?

But seriously if our moderator and your self would stop stomping around the forum like Bill Sykes and Bullseye and just stop and look at the facts...they are these.

As far as the forum is concerned it was a more peaceful place without you...read it back. There was a contentious but interesting thread - ‘Careless Tories’ - introduced which generated the usual ‘raised voices’, but apart from our moderator (a misnomer if ever there was one) telling everyone that I’d had a bad few days (I hadn’t), indulging in his usual jibes and referring to me as ‘ignorant’...it was all quite amicable. Then early Saturday afternoon the tone was changed completely by our moderator’s attempted and misleading slur, which btw stems back to a private disagreement we had approaching three months ago, and then you returned...the rest is history.

Now, tbh, I couldn’t care less whether I speak with or to you and AF ever again or not. Indulging in witless personal abuse is not what I’m on here for. Disagreement, even heated disagreement, is one thing...personal abuse? I think we can all do without it.

Mr. Faber has gone down the route of trying to discredit me by releasing the tiniest (misleading) detail of our exchange from early November. I note he has backed off entirely since I offered to make the whole spat public if that was how he wanted to go but, as I say...if I never communicate with either of you again it will bother me not one jot. If however he does want to make public all the details of our private (pm) spat then it will involve all the facts, both sides of the argument and not just his version.

The ball is in his court. For now I have nothing either to hide or to add.

[Trickytreesreds]

Wow...and to think I was called the ‘inevitable coda’! As for my ‘paranoia’...how can it be paranoia when you actually named me in your ‘pilot’ reference?

But seriously if our moderator and your self would stop stomping around the forum like Bill Sykes and Bullseye and just stop and look at the facts...they are these.

As far as the forum is concerned it was a more peaceful place without you...read it back. There was a contentious but interesting thread - ‘Careless Tories’ - introduced which generated the usual ‘raised voices’, but apart from our moderator (a misnomer if ever there was one) telling everyone that I’d had a bad few days (I hadn’t), indulging in his usual jibes and referring to me as ‘ignorant’...it was all quite amicable. Then early Saturday afternoon the tone was changed completely by our moderator’s attempted and misleading slur, which btw stems back to a private disagreement we had approaching three months ago, and then you returned...the rest is history.

Now, tbh, I couldn’t care less whether I speak with or to you and AF ever again or not. Indulging in witless personal abuse is not what I’m on here for. Disagreement, even heated disagreement, is one thing...personal abuse? I think we can all do without it.

Mr. Faber has gone down the route of trying to discredit me by releasing the tiniest (misleading) detail of our exchange from early November. I note he has backed off entirely since I offered to make the whole spat public if that was how he wanted to go but, as I say...if I never communicate with either of you again it will bother me not one jot. If however he does want to make public all the details of our private (pm) spat then it will involve all the facts, both sides of the argument and not just his version.

The ball is in his court. For now I have nothing either to hide or to add.

Funnly enough, I'd disagree. But ultimately, the "abuse" as you call it was not started by me, but my mere presence seemed to trigger it.
That speaks volumes.
I gave the instigator some of his own back, in a minimum amount.
Now you don't agree with that and that is your perogative which I could respect.
However, seeing as you NEVER object to one of your mates abuse volleys, it makes you look rather biased, selective and silly in your moral stances.

I have no beef with you RA, sure I pull your leg, but so do you and follow it up with a (which you think makes it all ok)

Human nature says, that folks will always respond to how others respond to them.
I could be very forgiving in your hurt, if the consistancy was there, but it isn't.

If you really are that easily upset, then a forum isn't for you dear. These are text words on a digital screen. Not someone screaming in your face.

May I suggest you lighten up a little?
You can have a hug if you want one?

[swaledale]

Lol

Well of course there is the **** stirring you do, throwing out accusations which are false, merely because one of your famous opinions based on spurious anecdotal "evidence" is challenged But then you do like throwing the proverbial "dead cat" into the mix when you have been shown to be wrong.

[Andy_Faber]

Well of course there is the **** stirring you do, throwing out accusations which are false, merely because one of your famous opinions based on spurious anecdotal "evidence" is challenged But then you do like throwing the proverbial "dead cat" into the mix when you have been shown to be wrong.

Lol at that too. Everyone here knows you have a Tricky fixation that you try and fail to cover up. You recently wrote ‘If I involuntary read any more of Thickys pearls of wisdom, i think I might piss myself laughing!!’ It might be credible to claim ‘inadvertently’ reading the odd word, but not enough to form an opinion. Time to ‘fess up

[Trickytreesreds]

Lol at that too. Everyone here knows you have a Tricky fixation that you try and fail to cover up. You recently wrote ‘If I involuntary read any more of Thickys pearls of wisdom, i think I might piss myself laughing!!’ It might be credible to claim ‘inadvertently’ reading the odd word, but not enough to form an opinion. Time to ‘fess up

Everyone knows he reads everything I type. His attempts at camoflage are hysterical.
As said, if he really had me on ignore, he really would ignore, Never read, never reply, never comment,
But he's such a bell end, you just know he's sat in his bedsit, screwing up his bib in frustration, until he can stand it no more and begin his key board assault.
Then he sits there sighing in a pool of jism at his triumph of a cunning plan of insults, under the guise he doesn't care.

It really is hilarious. Long may it continue.

He's like that love struck schoolboy, in the playground. Tapping girls on the arm looking for attention, ( No that's not a jibe at you RA, before your paranoia kicks in) xxxx

[swaledale]

Lol at that too. Everyone here knows you have a Tricky fixation that you try and fail to cover up. You recently wrote ‘If I involuntary read any more of Thickys pearls of wisdom, i think I might piss myself laughing!!’ It might be credible to claim ‘inadvertently’ reading the odd word, but not enough to form an opinion. Time to ‘fess up

Sigh, I really do have to conclude that your powers of deduction are rather poor, that plus by the speed with which you disappear when one of your dubious opinions have been proven to be wrong and hope that it will blow over shows a certain weakness of character which is rather amusing.

Anyway, let me explain so that you can understand how I involuntary read one of Thickys posts.

First look at your post no 14 - now do you see how you have quoted my post in yours? Got that? Now obviously if some other poster does the same and quotes a Thicky post in their post, then despite the fact that I have Thicky on ignore (which means unless I choose to view them, his posts are not visible to me) the post by Thicky the other poster quotes will be fully visible to me.

Now thats when I read what Thicky has posted, because through no action of mine, other than to read say rA's post with Thickys post quote in it, its visible. So as you can hopefully understand, nothing to fess up sorry old chap!

Now have you got this old timer, because it really is quite simple to understand. though I am sympathetic to you, as you do seem to have problems understanding simple concepts, as comments like "broadly non racist" show. Also your memory seems to be failing as you falsely claiming I used abuse and insults in a recent post when its clear I hadn't, also demonstrate.

If everyone one here knows I have a Thicky fixation (which rather sounds like one of your broad assumptions with no evidence to support it) then I'm afraid they would be mistaken, certainly you are mistaken on this occasion.

I'm amazed that Thicky should continually demonstrate how dim he is with his inane posts that are generally so far removed from reality as to be not worth reading and I long since learned he is impervious to facts, existing within some bizarre bubble and its no use even trying to have a debate. Hence why he is on ignore and I rarely post a response to him, as i don't read the crap he posts.

I did use to think you were different, but its become apparent that you have nearly as narrow perspective on the world and the same tendency to throw in some random unsubstantiated opinion, then refuse to acknowledge when shown to be wrong.

The truth with both of you is that I frequently piss my self laughing at your posts and the one I'm replying to makes you look rather foolish, though I suspect you thought you were being clever at the time.

Anyway must dash, so toodle pip old boy and do think carefully before posting assertions that clearly aren't true in future. So LOL to you.

[Andy_Faber]

Sigh, I really do have to conclude that your powers of deduction are rather poor, that plus by the speed with which you disappear when one of your dubious opinions have been proven to be wrong and hope that it will blow over shows a certain weakness of character which is rather amusing.

Anyway, let me explain so that you can understand how I involuntary read one of Thickys posts.

First look at your post no 14 - now do you see how you have quoted my post in yours? Got that? Now obviously if some other poster does the same and quotes a Thicky post in their post, then despite the fact that I have Thicky on ignore (which means unless I choose to view them, his posts are not visible to me) the post by Thicky the other poster quotes will be fully visible to me.

Now thats when I read what Thicky has posted, because through no action of mine, other than to read say rA's post with Thickys post quote in it, its visible. So as you can hopefully understand, nothing to fess up sorry old chap!

Now have you got this old timer, because it really is quite simple to understand. though I am sympathetic to you, as you do seem to have problems understanding simple concepts, as comments like "broadly non racist" show. Also your memory seems to be failing as you falsely claiming I used abuse and insults in a recent post when its clear I hadn't, also demonstrate.

If everyone one here knows I have a Thicky fixation (which rather sounds like one of your broad assumptions with no evidence to support it) then I'm afraid they would be mistaken, certainly you are mistaken on this occasion.

I'm amazed that Thicky should continually demonstrate how dim he is with his inane posts that are generally so far removed from reality as to be not worth reading and I long since learned he is impervious to facts, existing within some bizarre bubble and its no use even trying to have a debate. Hence why he is on ignore and I rarely post a response to him, as i don't read the crap he posts.

I did use to think you were different, but its become apparent that you have nearly as narrow perspective on the world and the same tendency to throw in some random unsubstantiated opinion, then refuse to acknowledge when shown to be wrong.

The truth with both of you is that I frequently piss my self laughing at your posts and the one I'm replying to makes you look rather foolish, though I suspect you thought you were being clever at the time.

Anyway must dash, so toodle pip old boy and do think carefully before posting assertions that clearly aren't true in future. So LOL to you.

There are quite a few contradictions in that post Swale

[Geoff Parkstone]

So, erm, you don't want to converse with AF and TTR and some months ago you said the same of me....

So that's perhaps 30% of the forum membership that you don't want to talk to.

Seems like you're narrowing the forum down to those that agree with you and avoiding contrary opinion. I think what you're looking for, in the States, would be termed a circle jerk (in the OED sense, not Urban Dictionary!)