Proud to be...

[Mickymoody]

Strange why a poster would refer to me twice, in a post that I haven't posted in! Maybe my reputation precedes me, maybe the poster is jealous, maybe the poster needs to get a life, and stop abusing me. Is there a need or reason to refer to external posters within a thread? Nobody else does it. Weird.

 

[PrenticeBoyofDerry]

You obviously don't read all the threads, as your name often pops up more than twice. I would be quite disappointed with only a two name count so far, if I had your alleged reputation!
Now if there was a tongue-in-check emotion I would now be using it, so please use your imagination

PS. No offence, MM, Micky, Mr Moody or Mrs Moody's other half. Which ever is the preferred or least offence term to use to address you, my fine sir!

 

[Alarm]

Having reread this I cannot see where Moodys names been mentioned once let alone twice.

Oops now its been mentioned once, so he was using foresight.

 

[jarvis2]

It wasn't funny. It was imagination taken to extreme lengths. It was designed to assume that your audience are illiterate and incapable of a little research.

How sad do you need to be to research a joke FFS?

Ah, yes, of course, as sad as you.

 

[RedHerring2]

IMO a joke needs to be funny, witty or clever. Your post was a string of pure fallacies, neither witty nor funny. Being fallacious, it was obviously not clever. In conclusion, you based a perfectly acceptable statement on that string of fallacies.
If it had been based on plausible fallacies, then it might have been clever.

You'll never make a stand-up comic, if you can't take the heckling.

 

[jarvis2]

IMO a joke needs to be funny, witty or clever. Your post was a string of pure fallacies, neither witty nor funny. Being fallacious, it was obviously not clever. In conclusion, you based a perfectly acceptable statement on that string of fallacies.
If it had been based on plausible fallacies, then it might have been clever.

You'll never make a stand-up comic, if you can't take the heckling.

You silly little t wat, who in their right mind would look at an obvious joke and spend even a few seconds of their lives doing research to prove it wrong. FFS get out and get a life.

If that joke was based on fact it would not be a joke, it would be a list of facts you great plumb...

That said, if you really want to be a dickhead all of your life, go here
//www.diynot.com/forums/viewforum.php?f=38

I reckon you could spend a couple of years doing research to prove none of the content is based on fact.

 

[sooey]

Just like mickymoody ....He thinks it's everyone else who's off their heads as well.

 

[jarvis2]

Just like mickymoody ....He thinks it's everyone else who's off their heads as well.

Stop digging Troll.

 

[RedHerring2]

For a five week old member, you seem to be well practised in the art of personal insults, Jarvis. I'm refering to how long you've been a member, rather than your age, assuming you're not a re-incarnated former member.
Of course, if you are a re-incarnated former member, I can't imagine why that would have been necessary.

I suppose, if I was bored, I could research how many of your 100 or so posts contain personal insults. But I'm not bored, so I'll skip it.

Thanks for the link to the jokes forum. Lets see how long it takes before yours ends up there. Perhaps you'll need to do a little prompting in order for that to happen.

 

[jarvis2]

Thanks for the link to the jokes forum. Lets see how long it takes before yours ends up there. Perhaps you'll need to do a little prompting in order for that to happen.

All jokes end up there fool.

I hope you have some real fun researching all those jokes for accuracy.

So sad...

 

[RedHerring2]

All jokes end up there fool.

Exactly. I doubt if yours could make it there on its own merit. You'll have to prompt the mods or admin to move it for you.

It makes no differrence how many insults you can sling. It still wasn't funny, and the more insults that you throw about the more likely you are to be needing a new 'nom de plume'. It certainly won't win you any friends and it only influences others negatively. But with your experience you should have learnt that by now.

 

[jarvis2]

It makes no differrence how many insults you can sling. It still wasn't funny, and the more insults that you throw about the more likely you are to be needing a new 'nom de plume'. It certainly won't win you any friends and it only influences others negatively. But with your experience you should have learnt that by now.

Not everyone finds the same joke funny, but I have never in my entire life come across anyone so sad that they feel the need to monitor jokes for factual content.

Had you just said you did not find it funny, I would not have replied to you. You did comment and so I replied. On the other hand, you could have just admitted to yourself even that you had been a tad anal in researching the facts of a harmless joke and then just left it at that.

But you are obviously so easily wound up (fools often are) that even now you are trying to justify your original stupidity.

Be a man and admit (even just to yourself) that researching a joke for accuracy was not the brightest of things to do and let it go at that.

 

[LooPrEvil]

There was nothing funny about the OPs original post, apart from the fact it was so out dated.

Any sensible person would surely check their facts before posting?

 

[RedHerring2]

.......Be a man and admit (even just to yourself) that researching a joke for accuracy was not the brightest of things to do and let it go at that.

Despite your protestations of your original post being a joke, it appeared to me like a statement of your pride and nationality based on some fictitious, imaginary ramblings.
I see the faith of religious fanatics and the assertions of political extremists based on similar widely inaccurate 'untruths'.

Maybe you saw it on another website and admired it for it's solidarity, so you copied it across without realising it's implausibility. Or perhaps you thought of it yourself and forgot to include a bit of plausibility in there.

Next time try the plausibility check.

 

[RedHerring2]

I think it's you who are missing the point.
You posted something completely implausible, in the hope that we might accept it or find it funny, or clever.
As stated, it was not funny and it was not clever, it was so obviously implausible.

If I had simply stated to you that your facts were completely inaccurate you would have asked for some proof of my accusation. I provided my proof of your implausibility before being asked. Judging by others disproof of your other ramblings, I assume that I was normal and healthy in my behaviour?


The current state of affairs as I see, is that you've resorted to abuse and personal insults because no-one found your joke funny. That isn't normal and healthy behaviour.

Finally:
Your statement about your pride and nationality is based on inaccurate suppositions.
I hope that this is the only area of your beliefs that are so affected.