Locked out of a thread

[Brigadier]

Here's a journalist being locked out - repeatedly - of pointing out Deform, Fromage, and RWR hypocrisy and thin skin.

Get exorcised about that, rather than a privately run forum.

 

[MNW67]

"..so, are you saying you never......."
Answer: No.

I think I get it now!

Is it a type of double negative?

 

[noseall]

I think I get it now!

Is it a type of double negative?

No.

I answered MBK’s question correctly. The fact that the dim witted moron does not understand his own grammar and has gone off on one, is his problem.

I’m sure he’ll apologise when he realises.

 

[MNW67]

No.

I answered MBK’s question correctly. The fact that the dim witted moron does not understand his own grammar and has gone off on one, is his problem.

I’m sure he’ll apologise when he realises.

I think I was on the right lines. It might not technically be a double negative, but it is to do with grammatical construction.

 

[motorbiking]

No.

I answered MBK’s question correctly. The fact that the dim witted moron does not understand his own grammar and has gone off on one, is his problem.

I’m sure he’ll apologise when he realises.

Post 21 & 31 Boyo - straight out lies

 

[motorbiking]

I think I get it now!

Is it a type of double negative?

Its at best an answer intended to deceive and in the context of the previous discussion a reinforcement of a lie.

 

[noseall]

should always quote the whole paragraph from the post you are replying to - not just a few words

Nonsense.

I’ve recently responded to Secure in the ‘66 thread. If I’d left the whole paragraph in, it would have been misleading or dishonest. My response was only relevant to the first few words.

 

[MNW67]

Its at best an answer intended to deceive and in the context of the previous discussion a reinforcement of a lie.

I'm torn between my love of language and grammar and not wanting to get involved in somebody else's spat!

But I have to say, on this occasion, we all got it wrong. Me included.

 

[noseall]

Post 21 & 31 Boyo - straight out lies

Nonsense.

You are a renowned spineless liar (add chicken to that) and you don’t even understand your OWN grammar, so forgive the forum for disregarding your ignorance.

 

[noseall]

It’s at best an answer intended to deceive and in the context of the previous discussion a reinforcement of a lie.

Nonsense. I answered your question honestly and correctly. If I’d answered ‘yes’, then you would have recourse.

Learn to read, dummy.
Edit: I’ve screenshotted the post, so don’t try your usual dishonest tricks.

 

[Munroast]

Nonsense.

I’ve recently responded to Secure in the ‘66 thread. If I’d left the whole paragraph in, it would have been misleading or dishonest. My response was only relevant to the fist few words.

what you cut out was pertinent to what he said, ok it didn't alter meaning in this case but it hid a reference to what the other poster had felt was important - and what were you saving by deleting a dozen words ? by all means highlight the relevant words to what you are responding to - but don't cut stuff out (or at the very least inform others that you have snipped or hidden content)

 

[noseall]

what you cut out was pertinent to what he said, ok it didn't alter meaning in this case but it hid a reference to what the other poster had felt was important - and what were you saving by deleting a dozen words ? by all means highlight the relevant words to what you are responding to - but don't cut stuff out (or at the very least inform others that you have snipped or hidden content)

Why not? It makes no sense, and the other poster is irelevant in this case.
Secures' post is still there for folk to read and is accessible (for context) via the convenient one touch link back.

 

[blup]

Some people are pathological liars and nosefukkall is one of them.

Pathological liar? Really? Do you mean maintains an argument and doesn’t give up?

Usually such people are also self professed experts in things they haven't got a clue about.
Just look at the amount of posting he does whilst claiming that he's the busiest builder on the planet. We all know that when we work we haven't got time for the internet, but somehow he does.

That applies to pretty much all the regular posters on both sides of the typical threads/discussions. It’s called multi tasking.

I consider it a medical condition, so I simply stay away from such people as if they had leprosy.

See post#9

 

[Munroast]

Why not? It makes no sense, and the other poster is ireelevant in this case.
Secures' post is still there for folk to read and is accessible (for context) via the convenient one touch ink back.

too often used to hide things and take stuff out of context - you know fine well others won't use that back button on every post they read. it's an unpleasant tactic you seem to like to use

pity the forum software does not highlight when quoted posts were snipped or altered

 

[MNW67]

too often used to hide things and take stuff out of context - you know fine well others won't use that back button on every post they read.

It can be used too aggressively. There are offenders on both sides. The key is to trim enough to aid clarity, whilst still leaving enough context to keep the original meaning.