Interesting, so when people are labelled ‘RWR’ for their opinions, that’s just an observation, but when I push back on that kind of labelling, it’s an ‘attack’?
Both just descriptors, so that you don't spend post after post (continuing to pick the stick up by the wrong end).
Given the above, this is a leap of faith (and incorrect, as it happens. Which I told you before).That’s a bit of a double standard, isn’t it?
No problem. In this instance, and I repeat, I was using it as a descriptor.So lets get this straight, if you think calling people ‘RWR’ is fair, then you should have no problem with me questioning that label.
At least you know - now - those to whom I was referring. The once who make false claims (put up strawmen) against other posters, as they cannot bear to agree with them, and their pragmatic approach*.......
*for the avoidance of any doubt, "Fast processing, and prompt return of unsuccessful applicants" does not mean "Come one! Come all!"
It means that "We can't realistically stop the boats, but we can do something - proactively and efficiently - about those that do board them".
Again, you've climbed up the wrong hill and, rather than come back down, remain willing to die on it.Otherwise, it looks like you just want to dish out criticism but can’t handle any in return.
It also has a number of names for those who, even when informed of their error, persist in making it.the english language has a name for that
And before anyone whinges / gloats about posting at this ungodly hour, I agree.
I'm up to take my firstborn to the airport.
Last edited:

