PDA

View Full Version : I have nothing to say ...



Andy McGregor
25th-June-2005, 01:50 PM
I've recently started posting again after a break of a few weeks while I moved house. Once in a while I did nip in and take a look at the Forum but didn't think I had anything to add to the particular discussions that were going on - so that's what I did, I didn't add anything.

The point of this thread is to debate a particular behavior trait I've observed. There is a certain kind of post where the sub-text is something like 'I've got nothing to say on this subject but I've read what's being said and don't think you should be saying it' or 'I've got nothing to say on this subject but I don't like the way you're saying what you're saying' or even, 'I've got nothing to say on this subject but I don't like the people that are saying what's being said'.

Here's an example of what I mean;


Its well known on this forum how you feel about certain subjects and certain people,Christ you go on about it enough.If things change ,so be it,but for the meantime can we just have a rest from all this bickering.

I've found loads more and decided against boring people with them.

It is my opinion that when a thread is about a particular subject you should not post on that thread to say we shouldn't be discussing that subject. If people are discussing something it's because they think they should be. To go onto that thread and say that those people posting on it should not be doing so is quite insulting. And, it is also saying that the moderators aren't doing their job properly.

I think that if you don't want to read the debate about a particular subject don't click on it. My opinion is that if you want to police what's being debated ask Franck to give you a job as a moderator. But otherwise you should argue for or against the subject being debated rather than attempt to halt the debate or insult those who are debating the subject.

And, here is the question. Why do they do it?

LMC
25th-June-2005, 02:31 PM
I think that if you don't want to read the debate about a particular subject don't click on it. My opinion is that if you want to police what's being debated ask Franck to give you a job as a moderator. But otherwise you should argue for or against the subject being debated rather than attempt to halt the debate or insult those who are debating the subject.

If the subject is dance-related then fair enough. If it's a personal attack against an individual, potentially libellous or a "sensitive" topic that would be more appropriate for a topic-related forum, then you have to expect to end up armpit-deep in popcorn.

Unfortunately, you haven't given any examples of 'subjects' on which people are trying to halt debate.

Therefore, IMVHO, this is a "hidden agenda" thread - line up folks - I'm off to MJC later, the popcorn stall will be closing early.


And, here is the question. Why do they do it?

To annoy you of course

JazzBug
25th-June-2005, 02:34 PM
Woh! Brave post Andy, but you never where particularly shy :wink:

I’m with you on this one although I must say I’ve not read enough of the posts to have seen this a lot, I have however seen it happen all over the web and you make several excellent points.

As a relative noobie :blush: to this forum i don't want to spend hours pawing over information like a historian over ancient scriptures just incase the topics already been covered. I want to know what people think today!

If it’s just someone blowing their top at someone else then fine, boring! But everyone needs a rant every now and again :sick: Its want this medium is all about; take what you want and leave what you don’t but don’t stop other people from doing the same.

.oO) JazzBug (Oo.
aka Oli

JazzBug
25th-June-2005, 02:43 PM
Therefore, IMVHO, this is a "hidden agenda" thread - line up folks .

Do'h. Do you think i've been sucked in too easily??? :nice:


I'm off to MJC later.
Cya there! First time tonight, i feel about 15 again, all excited. :blush:

Little Monkey
25th-June-2005, 02:48 PM
I just want to say I have nothing to add to this discussion, but I am, err, insulted and annoyed, and I think the forum is full of twerps and, errrr, plonkers and, err, I'm sure lots of people would agree, and lots of people would disagree, and I don't care, because I know nothing about the subject anyway, but I thought I'd post my opinion, or lack of opinion, because that's apparently the done thing, and I'm getting pretty sore fingers from typing this, and shouldn't ther be a full stop in this somewhere?

Phew.

Feel better now. :whistle:

Rambling Monkey

PS - gimme some popcorn!!!

Andy McGregor
25th-June-2005, 03:03 PM
If the subject is dance-related then fair enough. If it's a personal attack against an individual, potentially libellous or a "sensitive" topic that would be more appropriate for a topic-related forum, then you have to expect to end up armpit-deep in popcorn.This is the job of the moderator. If one of us humble Forumites sees this happenning there is a mechanism for reporting it to a moderator.


Unfortunately, you haven't given any examples of 'subjects' on which people are trying to halt debate.Apart from the example I gave this is true. And I didn't give loads of examples because I didn't want to be seen as having a specific hidden agenda by picking on people - I even hid the name of the author of the one example I did give.


Therefore, IMVHO, this is a "hidden agenda" thread - line up folks See above :innocent:

All my agendas are very clearly stated.


To annoy you of courseI don't get annoyed at this, I get excited that someone has stuck their chin out and said 'hit me here'.


Do'h. Do you think i've been sucked in too easily??? No. As I've no hidden agenda there was nothing to suck you into :innocent:

My objective, which I must admit I didn't state very clearly, is to reduce the level of people trying to throw wet blankets over heated threads. Those involved in heated debate are quite enjoying themselves. And, to judge by the number of views these debates get, they are quite popular threads.

This all about choice. And you don't have to look. Consider TV, there are many programmes you don't watch because you find them offensive. But some people do watch them and write in to complain. To them the answer has got to be don't watch what you don't like and then complain that you didn't like it. Having said that, I think there's too much sport and reality television at the moment. Especially cricket - any amount is to much. But, I don't ever watch it ...

Andy McGregor
25th-June-2005, 03:09 PM
-snip-

All my agendas are very clearly stated.

-snip-

My objective, which I must admit I didn't state very clearly, Can't you be consistent? Either 'all' your agendas are clear or they aren't :angry:

The heat must have addled your brain.

JazzBug
25th-June-2005, 03:13 PM
No. As I've no hidden agenda there was nothing to suck you into :innocent:
I've sucked you into my hidden agenda now!!! ( :devil: evil laugh :devil: ).
Unfortunately i'm too dull whitted to make anything of it.

Nows the time to quit before i say something outragously offensive! :yum:

Little Monkey
25th-June-2005, 03:14 PM
Can't you be consistent? Either 'all' your agendas are clear or they aren't :angry:

The heat must have addled your brain.

Oh dear..... One has started talking to oneself. Very bad. :rofl:

Concerned Monkey

LMC
25th-June-2005, 03:27 PM
This all about choice. And you don't have to look.

But you don't know if it will offend you until you HAVE looked - a perfectly innocuous thread title isn't (unlike TV program titles and guides) a clue to the offensive/obscene/libellous/popcorn-littered* nature of the thread content.

* delete as applicable

The post you chose as an example actually hails from a "personal attack" thread, so is not a good example of the principle you are trying to debate.


Oh dear..... One has started talking to oneself. Very bad.

Well, one has to have someone to talk to who understands one

(that's my excuse anyway)... oops, did I just say that out loud?

Little Monkey
25th-June-2005, 03:35 PM
Well, one has to have someone to talk to who understands one
(that's my excuse anyway)... oops, did I just say that out loud?

Oh dear, it seems to be contagious.....

Very Concerned Little Monkey

Andy McGregor
25th-June-2005, 03:42 PM
The post you chose as an example actually hails from a "personal attack" thread, so is not a good example of the principle you are trying to debate.But that particular post was not relevant to the person we were debating. It was a dig at one the the debators - which is exactly the point I was making.

Well, one has to have someone to talk to who understands oneI just thought I'd point out my inconsistency before someone else.


(that's my excuse anyway)... oops, did I just say that out loud?Don't worry, most of the pixies are near the fan and it's a bit noisy. Only the tropical pixies near the CD drive heard you.

LMC
25th-June-2005, 04:04 PM
There is a certain kind of post where the sub-text is something like (1) 'I've got nothing to say on this subject but I've read what's being said and don't think you should be saying it' or (2) 'I've got nothing to say on this subject but I don't like the way you're saying what you're saying' or even, (3) 'I've got nothing to say on this subject but I don't like the people that are saying what's being said'.

(NB: my numbering)

In a personal attack thread, the first and second reasons for posting are perfectly valid and reasonable IMO.


But that particular post was not relevant to the person we were debating. It was a dig at one the the debators - which is exactly the point I was making.

So it's OK for you to start a thread having a go at someone but not OK for someone else to have a go at you for having a go at someone else?

Andy McGregor
25th-June-2005, 05:10 PM
So it's OK for you to start a thread having a go at someone but not OK for someone else to have a go at you for having a go at someone else?We were debating the existence of Fletch as a real person with her own opinion. Based on Fletch's entry onto the Forum it seemed a reasonable thread. Fletch was demonstrating that she was equipped to and prepared to stick up for herself. I'm sure she appreciated the support she got and enjoyed the light-hearted fisticuffs. Neither side of the debate needed a non-contributor to step in and tell them it was 'time gentlemen please'.

And, of course, people can say what they like about me. But they need to be prepared for a robust reaction :devil:

NOW, to get back with the programme - which means we aren't talking about Andy McGregor in particular here. There are wet blankets out there who seem to think they can close down a thread - why do they think it's their right to do so? :confused: They're acting like your dad. One of the things that makes me see red is when someone tells me to 'grow up'. And that is what these 'grown ups' are trying to do. What makes them think it's their place to do this?

Maybe someone else can take a trawl through some threads and come up with some examples of wet blankets trying to stifle heated debate - I can only remember the recent ones that people threw in my direction and quoting them will make NewKid think, quite understandably, that I've got a hidden agenda.

Little Monkey
25th-June-2005, 05:32 PM
They're acting like your dad.

Oh god, now I'm scared. My dad would fire up the flamethrower, whilst laughing in a very manic way, before throwing more petrol on the thread to make it burn better.... :devil: :eek:

Or were you not referring to my dad??

Scared Monkey - got the fire blankets out just in case!

Andy McGregor
25th-June-2005, 06:01 PM
Oh god, now I'm scared. My dad would fire up the flamethrower, whilst laughing in a very manic way, before throwing more petrol on the thread to make it burn better.... :devil: :eek:

Or were you not referring to my dad??

Scared Monkey - got the fire blankets out just in case!Hey, LM, I like the sound of your dad. Definitely not a wet blanket. More of a mad gorilla :clap:

Little Monkey
25th-June-2005, 06:05 PM
Hey, LM, I like the sound of your dad. Definitely not a wet blanket. More of a mad gorilla :clap:

Yep, you got him spot on! Absolute maniac! :eek:

And of course I'm nothing like my father.... All shy, quiet and easily intimidated. And no temper whatsoever.... :whistle:

Shy Little Monkey

Little Monkey
25th-June-2005, 06:26 PM
Hey, LM, I like the sound of your dad. Definitely not a wet blanket. More of a mad gorilla :clap:

Incidentally, here's a photo of good ol' dad.... He's such a sweet, good natured guy. And it's easy to see where I get my good looks from! :whistle:

Little Monkey :innocent:

El Salsero Gringo
25th-June-2005, 06:32 PM
We were debating the existence of Fletch as a real person with her own opinion. Based on Fletch's entry onto the Forum it seemed a reasonable thread.Not to anyone who hadn't taken their lunatic conspiracy theory pills that morning, it didn't.

How do you feel about people whose only contribution to a thread is to say how nasty, insulting and divisive it is?

Dreadful Scathe
25th-June-2005, 08:13 PM
How do you feel about people whose only contribution to a thread is to say how nasty, insulting and divisive it is?

Why? Do you think this thread is nasty, insulting and divisive ? :)

djtrev
25th-June-2005, 08:58 PM
As the "wet blanket" that you chose to highlight perhaps I could explain my position with regards to stifling your threads.
I have to say that I have enjoyed reading lots of the heated debates of late,in particular,the recent spat between Tramp and Cerocjock and the subsequent mauling of Tramp with regards to his set on Monday morning at Southport.The Fletch thread made for an interesting couple of days and her attack on you,Andy M was well worth the read.
As I pointed out at the time, your opinion about a certain individual and certain teaching methods is well documented and it was becoming a tad boring.At this moment it doesnt look as though you are having too much luck in changing the situation and because it would seem to be a somewhat sensitive area I am sure there is a lot you could say but cant or wont for possibly legal reasons.Either way all you seem to be doing is repeating yourself.
BUT my problem is you Andy.You may well be a very nice guy but on this forum you come over as bombastic,self-righteous and argumentative.The final straw was your challenge to CJ to debate 'abortion' and you would take the opposing view to CJ.After reading that I immediately took the view that any comment put forward by you regard a thread would be based ,not on your true feelings for the subject but on whether could get any 'mileage' from it.

ducasi
25th-June-2005, 09:15 PM
This all about choice. And you don't have to look. Consider TV, there are many programmes you don't watch because you find them offensive This isn't a TV programme, it's a public forum. You address and invite comment from the public. If the public is bored of listening to you, it's got a perfect right to say so.

Think of the word forum – the place where the Romans (or was it Greeks??) gathered to discuss the matters of the day. Don't you think that when the Romans gathered of an evening, if there were a bunch of people in the corner squabbling you would get people saying such things as (in the Latin patios of the time, of course) "gonnae gie us a rest?"

It's about making the environment of the forum a friendly, hospitable place, that will encourage people to come and stay and discuss things in a reasonable manner.

Your use of the word "police" to describe the job of a moderator is a good one, as, say, when people you know get into a "heated discussion" in public, unless it is turned really, really nasty you'll try to break it up without involving the police – they'd only get involved if things get way out of hand.

And so it is up to the public to calm down or shout down "discussion" it doesn't want to hear – the moderators are only there to step in when people go too far.

(Aside: Just don't try to tell the moderators how to do their jobs. It's fine to say that a discussion doesn't belong, it's insulting to say that the moderators should or should not have done something about it.)

Anyway, while some of us might like a bit of a bun-fight now and then, you won't find many who actually care for an argument for argument's sake. Perhaps there's a different forum for that. :flower:

David Bailey
25th-June-2005, 11:24 PM
OK, I've got some points:
1. Trying to calm a thread down never works, but I respect the efforts people make to try to inject some diplomacy into our dealings with each other. No-one likes to be told "can't we all just get along / agree to disagree", but that doesn't mean the person saying it doesn't have good motives at heart.

2. A virtual community is not an unemotional community. Individuals can and do get hurt and upset by others' postings; I've been both the receiver and giver of offense, as I'm sure many others have. Also, flame wars can damage online communities - I've seen it happen in Usenet groups. So call me a wet blanket-groupie, but anyone trying to avoid that has my respect.

3. If I ever try to defuse any animosity, it'll be by the now-classic "popcorn" trick ( :worthy: to NewKid), i.e. attempting to point out to both parties that they're being possibly OTT, in a humourous and hopefully non-offensive way. Dunno if it works any better than any other, but that's what I'd do.

Oh and:

{ everything he said }
:yeah:

Andy McGregor
26th-June-2005, 01:34 AM
BUT my problem is you Andy.You may well be a very nice guy but on this forum you come over as bombastic,self-righteous and argumentative.The final straw was your challenge to CJ to debate 'abortion' and you would take the opposing view to CJ.After reading that I immediately took the view that any comment put forward by you regard a thread would be based ,not on your true feelings for the subject but on whether could get any 'mileage' from it.That debate was never going to happen. It was used as a heavyweight counterpoint to the inconsequetial debate we were having. What we were discussing is as nothing compared to the big issues and that is what I was pointing out. I even said so later: something which djtrev seems to have missed. Come on djtrev get it right, I am argumentative, I am, occasionally bombastic. But self-righteous? Moi?

Andy McGregor
26th-June-2005, 01:37 AM
OK, I've got some points:
1. Trying to calm a thread down never works, :yeah:

So why do it? Maybe because people like djtrev think they're the 'grown up' and should treat everyone else like children :whistle:

My own opinion is that it's trying to be controlling. But I've no idea of the motivation.

MartinHarper
26th-June-2005, 01:43 AM
I find it strange when folks complain that some thread they're reading is boring, because being briefly bored is a mild punishment, and it's normally fairly easy to tell from a thread title whether a thread will be interesting. For example, "footwork for the first move" is unlikely to be interesting to people who don't share my foot fetish.

When folks complain (sincerely) that some thread they're reading is offensive, I can understand and sympathise. Sometimes I don't see why they find a thread offensive, and that can irritate me, but the general concept I don't have a problem with.


Maybe someone else can take a trawl through some threads and come up with some examples of wet blankets trying to stifle heated debate


Although I no longer post I do visit for a read once in a while and I thought I'd just pop in to say what a nasty divisive and insulting thread this is

David Bailey
26th-June-2005, 08:47 AM
So why do it? Maybe because people like djtrev think they're the 'grown up' and should treat everyone else like children :whistle:.
I think it's more a case of trying to do the online equivalent of separating two "Oi! You looking at my bird?" fighters in a pub. That never works either, unless the antagonists want to be separated, but people still do it.

P.S. Martin, that's a vintage HarperLink that is :worthy:

Andy McGregor
26th-June-2005, 12:29 PM
Maybe someone else can take a trawl through some threads and come up with some examples of wet blankets trying to stifle heated debate



Although I no longer post I do visit for a read once in a while and I thought I'd just pop in to say what a nasty divisive and insulting thread this is

Thank you Mr Harper for pointing out my mistake. I have been exhibiting 'wet blanket' behavior too. And I am willing to admit my mistake and try to change. Is anyone else willing to do the same?

Andy McGregor
26th-June-2005, 12:31 PM
P.S. Martin, that's a vintage HarperLink that is :worthy: :yeah:

I wish I'd done it myself it's such a beauty :tears:

Gadget
26th-June-2005, 09:25 PM
This isn't a TV programme, it's a public forum. You address and invite comment from the public. If the public is bored of listening to you, it's got a perfect right to say so.:yeah::yawn:


Anyway, while some of us might like a bit of a bun-fight now and then, you won't find many who actually care for an argument for argument's sake. Perhaps there's a different forum for that. :flower:Argument for argument's sake is actually quite fun... when it's about abstracts rather than people:

"Black is not black, just an absence of colour (or the mixing of all colours), which is also the definition of white - therefore black is white."
would be a good argument that I would argue for argument's sake.

Vs

"Your views are not mine so I opt out of any use of 'we' in any of your posts and replying to people while reffering to them in the third party in order to cross-examining them for hiden agendas is not condusive to a healthy forum"
Is just a provocative post that will just provide more of the same and is not anything I would want to read or participate in.

Lou
27th-June-2005, 07:31 AM
I find it strange when folks complain that some thread they're reading is boring, because being briefly bored is a mild punishment, and it's normally fairly easy to tell from a thread title whether a thread will be interesting. For example, "footwork for the first move" is unlikely to be interesting to people who don't share my foot fetish.But what about those of us who perversely continue to contribute the same boring arguments to footwork threads? The pleasure's in the pain of the boredom of pointless arguing? Very masochistic...

Argument for argument's sake is actually quite fun... :whistle: I love Monday mornings. :D


Black is not black, just an absence of colour Tell that to my wardrobe...

Andy McGregor
27th-June-2005, 08:45 AM
"Black is not black, just an absence of colour (or the mixing of all colours), which is also the definition of white - therefore black is white."Isn't black the absence of visible light?

David Bailey
27th-June-2005, 08:55 AM
But what about those of us who perversely continue to contribute the same boring arguments to footwork threads?
Yes, why do you do that? It is profoundly boring...


The pleasure's in the pain of the boredom of pointless arguing? Very masochistic...
Where's that whip icon again?

Dance Demon
27th-June-2005, 08:59 AM
:yeah::yawn:

Argument for argument's sake is actually quite fun... when it's about abstracts rather than people:

"Black is not black, just an absence of colour (or the mixing of all colours), which is also the definition of white - therefore black is white."
would be a good argument that I would argue for argument's sake.

Vs

"Your views are not mine so I opt out of any use of 'we' in any of your posts and replying to people while reffering to them in the third party in order to cross-examining them for hiden agendas is not condusive to a healthy forum"
Is just a provocative post that will just provide more of the same and is not anything I would want to read or participate in.


I've read throught this posting......and can only find one spelling mistake!!!!! :really: ................Who are you paying to post for you Gadget......... :D :D

David Bailey
27th-June-2005, 09:08 AM
I've read throught this posting......and can only find one spelling mistake!!!!! :really: ................Who are you paying to post for you Gadget......... :D :D
2 - "reffering" and "condusive".

I think it's authentic Gadget allright, suffer no imitations :)

On that note, where's Fletch gone? Fletch, are you there? Talk to us...

under par
27th-June-2005, 09:09 AM
Isn't black the absence of visible light?


Isn't BROWN this years BLACK?




I feel a new thread coming on

Andy McGregor
27th-June-2005, 09:14 AM
Isn't BROWN this years BLACK? Get with the programme. Brown was "the new black" 8 years ago. White is the new black for this summer - especially in Essex, where it's always been black* :confused:

*apart from underwear, which is worn as jewellery.

Lou
27th-June-2005, 09:15 AM
Yes, why do you do that? It is profoundly boring...
Where's that whip icon again?
I was wrong - it's not self-inflicted after all. :D The pleasure's in the boredom inflicted on DavidJames.

(Oh, and I donated the whip to DianaS.)

under par
27th-June-2005, 09:18 AM
Get with the programme. Brown was "the new black" 8 years ago. White is the new black for this summer - especially in Essex, where it's always been black* :confused:

*apart from underwear, which is worn as jewellery.

Obviously I was reading an old copy of VOGUE in the doctors surgery, I just didn't realise how old it was.

Is is really eight years....wow! :whistle:

Lou
27th-June-2005, 09:21 AM
Is is really eight years....wow! :whistle:
Fashion comes in cycles, you know....

under par
27th-June-2005, 09:26 AM
Fashion comes in cycles, you know....


God! thats where I've getting it wrong all these years....I've been looking in magazines......DOH!!! :blush:

Gojive
27th-June-2005, 09:29 AM
Fashion comes in cycles, you know....

So do washing machines.....

:na:

under par
27th-June-2005, 09:34 AM
Fashion comes on cycles, you know....

So do french onion sellers.......................apparently :whistle:


and 2 nuns!! :flower:

Lou
27th-June-2005, 09:46 AM
and 2 nuns!! :flower:
Where's the soap?

Gojive
27th-June-2005, 09:56 AM
and 2 nuns!!


Where's the soap?

Yes it does, and can also lead to bad habits......

stewart38
27th-June-2005, 01:53 PM
Not to anyone who hadn't taken their lunatic conspiracy theory pills that morning, it didn't.

How do you feel about people whose only contribution to a thread is to say how nasty, insulting and divisive it is?

Attention seeking, why they do that on a trained psychiatrist would know

Dreadful Scathe
16th-May-2007, 08:23 AM
Maybe someone else can take a trawl through some threads and come up with some examples of wet blankets trying to stifle heated debate

Its still going on, more than ever, ive noticed quite a few "give it a rest" , "lets stop this thread now" posts. These people should be banned in my opinion ;)

Barry Shnikov
16th-May-2007, 10:39 AM
Its still going on, more than ever, ive noticed quite a few "give it a rest" , "lets stop this thread now" posts. These people should be banned in my opinion ;)

OH, NO, THEY SHOULDN'T!!!

Dreadful Scathe
16th-May-2007, 11:03 AM
now you're shouting - i think we should stop this thread...

Barry Shnikov
16th-May-2007, 11:37 AM
now you're shouting - i think we should stop this thread...

Altogether now: OH, NO, WE SHOULDN'T!

LMC
16th-May-2007, 01:45 PM
>OBLIG<

Give it a rest.

Dreadful Scathe
16th-May-2007, 01:48 PM
give it a rest telling us to give it a rest. who do YOU THINK YOU ARE ???




...annnnnd escalate...

LMC
16th-May-2007, 01:52 PM
If you all stopped posting on this thread then it would stop.

Nothing to do with me.

[WHINE MODE = on]Why can't we just all be nice to each other?[OFF]

contd. p94

Dreadful Scathe
16th-May-2007, 01:58 PM
I HAD stopped posting but you just HAD TO HAVE THE LAST WORD. You're just like Hitler aren't you!!




the more irrational the better

Barry Shnikov
16th-May-2007, 02:55 PM
I HAD stopped posting but you just HAD TO HAVE THE LAST WORD. You're just like Hitler aren't you!!

I'm sorry, is this the five minute argument or the full half-hour?

LMC
16th-May-2007, 03:02 PM
Oh, and ANOTHER thing ...

No, I'm Spartacus - and so's my wife

CrazyArms
16th-May-2007, 07:10 PM
I'm not getting involved

DOH!

Just Did... :whistle:

Andy McGregor
17th-May-2007, 01:32 AM
I should never have started this thread. It's caused people to post total rubbish...

Green-eyed Monsta
17th-May-2007, 01:55 AM
I should never have started this thread. It's caused people to post total rubbish...

What? Just THIS thread? :whistle:

Andy McGregor
17th-May-2007, 07:54 AM
Where's the soap?Yes it does:whistle:



How did we all miss this in 2005?

Andy McGregor
17th-May-2007, 07:56 AM
What? Just THIS thread? :whistle:I really don't think that THIS is a suitable subject of the Forum and I'm really bored with discussing it ...

.. and you're all wrong anyway :innocent:

under par
17th-May-2007, 09:34 AM
I really don't think that THIS is a suitable subject of the Forum and I'm really bored with discussing it ...

.. and you're all wrong anyway :innocent:

For someone who has nothing to say you manage to say quite a lot Andy:wink:

Dreadful Scathe
17th-May-2007, 09:38 AM
For someone who has nothing to say you manage to say quite a lot Andy:wink:
is it a lot of nothing then ? :)

under par
17th-May-2007, 09:45 AM
is it a lot of nothing then ? :)

Nothing
NothingNothing
NothingNothing
NothingNothing
NothingNothing
NothingNothing
NothingNothing
NothingNothing
NothingNothing
NothingNothing


Now that is what you call a lot of nothing!

Lou
17th-May-2007, 10:01 AM
How did we all miss this in 2005?

I've always been underrated...