Guest Pokeherface Posted October 1, 2010 Share Posted October 1, 2010 Is this some sort of Gersnet happy hour where you get twice as much bone-grinding RST propaganda for the same price. RST propoganda includes people suggesting a coup and stating clearly that MD has to go? You really are not very bright, as well as being a sad individual. An intillectual minnow in a small pond. A truly great achievement. Kudos. Enough time wasted on you now. Wallow in peace. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmck 117 Posted October 1, 2010 Share Posted October 1, 2010 There was no epiphany, there was a slow and gradual realisation that while the trust undoubtably have some serious flaws, the claims made are not all legitimate. That really is not hard to follow. Where has anyone shown they can't follow it? But that's not the entirety of your realisation, though. You go slightly further. If your entire point was "Pathological hatred of the trust gives them a way out" you'd be right, and you wouldn't have a word of disagreement from me. But you go onto to think people haven't made that realisation - which shows you haven't read around here much - and that if everyone came to that realisation we'd be any closer to a newer better RST with the kind of changes you've mentioned. I've said that's just wrong, I done my best to explain why it's wrong, and if you disagree that's fine. Nice to see that anyone who disagrees doesnt just have a different opinion though. I will be sure to adjust my thoughts becuase you tell me I'm wrong (insert multiple 'rolleyes smilies' here) What are you even talking about? I accept you have a different opinion, but don't value it so much I won't stop from calling it wrong. Opinions can be wrong; I think yours is, you think MF's is. That's what debate is for heaven's sake, no need to be so touchy. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
maineflyer 0 Posted October 1, 2010 Share Posted October 1, 2010 RST propoganda includes people suggesting a coup and stating clearly that MD has to go? You really are not very bright, as well as being a sad individual. An intillectual minnow in a small pond. A truly great achievement. Kudos. Enough time wasted on you now. Wallow in peace. Bye ... and hurry back. I guess it was the "small pond" that got to him in the end. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmck 117 Posted October 1, 2010 Share Posted October 1, 2010 You really are not very bright, as well as being a sad individual. An intillectual minnow in a small pond. A truly great achievement. Kudos. Please refrain from the personal stuff. In our small pond if you can't make your point without resorting to personal insults you get warned 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
maineflyer 0 Posted October 1, 2010 Share Posted October 1, 2010 Please refrain from the personal stuff. In our small pond if you can't make your point without resorting to personal insults you get warned I saw that 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pokeherface Posted October 1, 2010 Share Posted October 1, 2010 Please refrain from the personal stuff. In our small pond if you can't make your point without resorting to personal insults you get warned And yet the person it was aimed at is here after personal insults towards PLGSARMY? Go figure 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
maineflyer 0 Posted October 1, 2010 Share Posted October 1, 2010 And yet the person it was aimed at is here after personal insults towards PLGSARMY? Go figure I wear my deserved warning with all due shame and humility:) Maybe you and I can compare warnings. That'll be fun and maybe we'll be friends. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pokeherface Posted October 1, 2010 Share Posted October 1, 2010 (edited) Where has anyone shown they can't follow it? But that's not the entirety of your realisation, though. You go slightly further. If your entire point was "Pathological hatred of the trust gives them a way out" you'd be right, and you wouldn't have a word of disagreement from me. But you go onto to think people haven't made that realisation - which shows you haven't read around here much - and that if everyone came to that realisation we'd be any closer to a newer better RST with the kind of changes you've mentioned. I've said that's just wrong, I done my best to explain why it's wrong, and if you disagree that's fine. What are you even talking about? I accept you have a different opinion, but don't value it so much I won't stop from calling it wrong. Opinions can be wrong; I think yours is, you think MF's is. That's what debate is for heaven's sake, no need to be so touchy. I have not once suggesting anything at all like that which your first paragraph states, which in turn leads to me being fixated with people not getting the point..... If you attach nonsense to debate, it gives people a way out. If you remove that and they STILL dont debate with you, or answer your questions, you are THEN entitled to raise it as an objection. While there is a get out, one you are giving them, you cannot complain that they use it. That is NOT me saying they are right to use it, it is me saying that if you want to criticise, go for it, but make sure you are clear yourself otherwise your points lose validity. Deedles post, which you have ignored completely proves beyond any reasonable doubt that I am not wrong and am indeed correct. They DO use these incidents as a get out, they do use them to cloud the issues and while they are wrong to do it, others are wrong for providing the smokescreen. Edited October 1, 2010 by Pokeherface 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pokeherface Posted October 1, 2010 Share Posted October 1, 2010 I wear my deserved warning with all due shame and humility:)Maybe you and I can compare warnings. That'll be fun and maybe we'll be friends. How many warnings do folk get then? because in my few days here I have seen you get torn into people regularly with personal insults. Actually, dont bother. At least I can find the 'ignore' function on FF, makes things so much easier. Appologies in public for the personal insults. It was a moment of weakness and will not happen again. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
maineflyer 0 Posted October 1, 2010 Share Posted October 1, 2010 I have not once suggesting anything at all like that which your first paragraph states, which in turn leads to me being fixated with people not getting the point..... If you attach nonsense to debate, it gives people a way out. If you remove that and they STILL dont debate with you, or answer your questions, you are THEN entitled to raise it as an objection. While there is a get out, one you are giving them, you cannot complain that they use it. That is NOT me saying they are right to use it, it is me saying that if you want to criticise, go for it, but make sure you are clear yourself otherwise your points lose validity. Deddles post, which you have ignored completely proves beyond any reasonable doubt that I am not wrong and am indeed correct. They DO use these incidents as a get out, they do use them to cloud the issues and while they are wrong to do it, others are wrong for providing the smokescreen. But what Deedle does not say is that if you don't afford them what you describe as a way out, that they will then respond differently, which they won't. You're the one trapped in a one-dimensional perspective, not bmck. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.