Boards Index › Chat rooms – the forum communities › Chat forum three boards › QUOTE OF THE DAY
-
AuthorPosts
-
8 June, 2012 at 6:11 pm #472640
@jen_jen wrote:
I like a bit of message board banter and humourr, but I’m really not into personal attacks and grudges of this kind.
They were my words although they weren’t posted today.
What is it with you and this ‘woman scorned’ stuff jen..?
You lost the discussion…just get over it because you’ll lose plenty more with your attitude .8 June, 2012 at 6:42 pm #472641@terry wrote:
@jen_jen wrote:
I like a bit of message board banter and humourr, but I’m really not into personal attacks and grudges of this kind.
They were my words although they weren’t posted today.
What is it with you and this ‘woman scorned’ stuff jen..?
You lost the discussion…just get over it because you’ll lose plenty more with your attitude .I did not lose the discussion, I opted out of it when you lost the capacity for debate and began resorting to personal attacks. In my opinion once you have to resort to personal attacks in a debate you’ve lost any argument or credibility that you might have had.
But you’re not into personal attacks are you Terry? At least, not when they’re directed at you.
8 June, 2012 at 6:47 pm #472642The kindest word in all the world is the unkind word, unsaid.
8 June, 2012 at 7:05 pm #472643@jen_jen wrote:
@terry wrote:
@jen_jen wrote:
I like a bit of message board banter and humourr, but I’m really not into personal attacks and grudges of this kind.
They were my words although they weren’t posted today.
What is it with you and this ‘woman scorned’ stuff jen..?
You lost the discussion…just get over it because you’ll lose plenty more with your attitude .I did not lose the discussion, I opted out of it when you lost the capacity for debate and began resorting to personal attacks. In my opinion once you have to resort to personal attacks in a debate you’ve lost any argument or credibility that you might have had.
But you’re not into personal attacks are you Terry? At least, not when they’re directed at you.
You’ve gotta stop this, Jen. I mean, I’m finding I’m agreeing with you more and more. :shock:
8 June, 2012 at 7:13 pm #472644Oooooh we can’t be having that panda :lol:
8 June, 2012 at 7:19 pm #472645@jen_jen wrote:
Oooooh we can’t be having that panda :lol:
Agreed.
* Orders the Daily Mail for delivery.
:P8 June, 2012 at 7:21 pm #472646@jen_jen wrote:
I did not lose the discussion, I opted out of it when you lost the capacity for debate and began resorting to personal attacks.
You opted out because you were getting your a rse kicked. The thing I dislike about all of this is the little clique that you, wordsworth and panda are a part of.
And your answers are always so smug and righteous. And then you pat each other on the back at your smugness. Neither one of you has a valid point to make, but that’s not my problem..it’s yours .8 June, 2012 at 7:44 pm #472647@terry wrote:
The thing I dislike about all of this is the little clique that you, wordsworth and panda are a part of. And your answers are always so smug and righteous. And then you pat each other on the back at your smugness. Neither one of you has a valid point to make, but that’s not my problem..it’s yours .
Terry!!!!! Shame on you!!! First of all don’t drag my name into your personal arguments when I’m not participating.
Secondly I have longed for righteousness ever since iniquity lost it’s sheen, thank you again.
Thirdly thank you for putting me in a clique, I had adopted a posture of splendid isolation in my late forties but it outlived its usefulness. Now I belong once more!!! And with Panda and jen_jen!! We’re like a left-wing Terry, Terry and Terry!!
Fourthly your critique of my back patting technique is most welcome, I was aiming for a grope. Must work on my reach-around.
Fifthly you mention three of us then say “neither”. I know precise use of English is your claimed forte, so perhaps you could identify which of two out of the three you meant.
Sixthly thank you for relieving me of the suspicion that I might have born down on you too hard, now I know my assertions are not your problem I can give myself some lattitude.
Gawd bless yer guvnor! Yer a diamond geezer!!!!
8 June, 2012 at 7:46 pm #472648Oh and arse-kicking is so artless. I prefer the use of an eight foot stock-whip, but modern housing usually only leaves room for a short yard-whip.
8 June, 2012 at 8:10 pm #472649@wordsworth60 wrote:
@terry wrote:
The thing I dislike about all of this is the little clique that you, wordsworth and panda are a part of. And your answers are always so smug and righteous. And then you pat each other on the back at your smugness. Neither one of you has a valid point to make, but that’s not my problem..it’s yours .
Terry!!!!! Shame on you!!! First of all don’t drag my name into your personal arguments when I’m not participating.
Secondly I have longed for righteousness ever since iniquity lost it’s sheen, thank you again.
Thirdly thank you for putting me in a clique, I had adopted a posture of splendid isolation in my late forties but it outlived its usefulness. Now I belong once more!!! And with Panda and jen_jen!! We’re like a left-wing Terry, Terry and Terry!!
Fourthly your critique of my back patting technique is most welcome, I was aiming for a grope. Must work on my reach-around.
Fifthly you mention three of us then say “neither”. I know precise use of English is your claimed forte, so perhaps you could identify which of two out of the three you meant.
Sixthly thank you for relieving me of the suspicion that I might have born down on you too hard, now I know my assertions are not your problem I can give myself some lattitude.
Gawd bless yer guvnor! Yer a diamond geezer!!!!
tsk
-
AuthorPosts
Get involved in this discussion! Log in or register now to have your say!