Cliffs of Dover, a Year Later

[taildraggernut]

Did you absolutely love it? Adore it? Or is this just the usual exaggeration for effect?

'usual'?.....what do you know about me?.....no simply 'I loved it' as in the conventional exclamation widely used in modern english to convey a sense of genuine 'entertainment', nothing unique in my use of the well established expression.

Let me help. A white knight is a rather grandiose emblem (deliberately). I am not claiming any spear of valour or leading a charge, I am simply giving back a little to a couple of the nastier members here, hence the natural justice.

The two are not incompatible, and they are not the same

Let me help you, there is no convention on any actual need to 'actually' have a horse or sharpened stick to be labelled as a 'white knight', again you seem to fail at grasping the use of metaphor.

It seems you are intent on dragging this down to semantic hair-splitting (where you are also mistaken) instead of going with the spirit of the thing. And in a sad kind of way, you are doing Hayward's work for him (if you are not him)

indeed I am not him, nor do I act on his behalf, quite frankly he/she/whatever is irrelevant, simply I made a response to an astounding act of hypocrisy in my own 'white knight' style, any further discussion could just as easily be circumvented by your own absence from them.

Your tone of sprightly success is a bit premature.

I'll boil it down for you. This place suffers because of the tone of those such as Hayward, Carguy, Ace of Aces et al.

And yes, you are trying to be clever by following this tack and trying to pick holes, rather than answer the main charge...which is the pure (veiled) spite of many of those posters named above. Fundamentally they get away with it because this forum is run in aid of the game, and they pretend to be doing a service by ridding it of pesky critics.

The end result is the exact opposite. They drag it down, confuse genuine critcism, and give a lop-sided view of the real state of play - which is still fairly atrocious.

That is a shame.

and this is supposed to make me believe you aren't self righteous?

You could try answering the main point, for a start...

The main point and reason I posted is:

Hayward's posts tend be nasty, especially towards non-native English language speakers. Others are also very nasty, and a lot of this goes unchecked.

Chivas sets himself up as some sort of soothsayer and hasn't a bleedin' clue.

Those who attack the critics in general act disproportionately (broadly sanctioned by places such as this being pro-game by nature...idont have a problem with this), and mask the true state of things, usually with slavish devotion. Often to comic effect, but also plain bloody irritating.

No *common sense* to be found in any of it.

Instead of sparring, answer the main point/s. I couldn't care less whether the language is flowery, fancy, matey or street-speak. That's not the point.

So you're telling me posters such as Hayward should just post away unchecked, aloof, nasty, cynical and manipulative? It is dowdy and cowardly.

No hole to be dug out of. Stop trying to bounce it onto me. Whether I am being 6/10 or 7/10 or 2/10 self-righteous is neither here nor there and beside the point.

[taildraggernut]

I guess I will have to quote these separately as you don't seem to be able to complete the act of thinking before speaking therefore the overuse ov self edited posts.

Eh? No prooclamation...or edict...or dictat...or whatever word you choose.

You have a problem with a command of the english language?

I am not ranting, not in the least

Au contraire..

Look at the above sentence. Logically it does not follow whatsoever. (To paraphrase) ranting...therefore my point is correct? Run that by me again...? It is saturday therefore this Easter egg is blue...?

Whaaa?.......are you ok?

Yes, there is plenty of ego - why get involved in a spat that doesn't involve you, but Hayward? Why try and appear to win a debate by making spurious points and ignoring the main charge? And why make non-logical statements and then claim victory/hypocrisy on the back of them? Probably a bit of a fun for you, and ego. A bit like Hayward. 'Other than to highlight'...oh, righty ho....sure, sure....

and whose authority did you have to involve yourself in responding to posts made by anybody else? you came pracing in here as if reciting a Shakespearian play justifies everything you say.

[taildraggernut]

You could try answering the main point, for a start...

The main point and reason I posted is:

Hayward's posts tend be nasty, especially towards non-native English language speakers. Others are also very nasty, and a lot of this goes unchecked.

Interesting....yet when Philiped criticised Chivas for his spelling you made no such attempt to nobly defend him.....I don't know Chivas but there is a chance English is not his first language, but I guess you nobly decided to keep quiet about that because Philiped is 'on your side'.......sniff....sniff....you smell that?.......smells like hypocricy.

[Wolf_Rider]

Oh well... that's this thread done


IBTL

[arthursmedley]

Originally Posted by Wolf_Rider

IBTL

Are you kidding!? Seven solid pages of this nonsense so far. These are, apparently, grown-up, tax payers and eligible to vote too, lol.

[Insuber]

"Darling, it's midnight, aren't you coming to bed tonight?"
"Just a minute Mary, someone is wrong on the Internet!"

[carguy_]

Originally Posted by Insuber

"Darling, it's midnight, aren't you coming to bed tonight?"
"Just a minute Mary, someone is wrong on the Internet!"

lol direct hit

[Volksieg]

Originally Posted by insuber

"darling, it's midnight, aren't you coming to bed tonight?"
"just a minute mary, someone is wrong on the internet!"

roflmao

Taildragger...you are grasping at straws. Like most I edit when I want to change or add something, as now. That's what the Edit function is for, believe it or not.

And you have still not answered the main point. This might be because you are not able to. Or it might be because you do not wish to. And would prefer a slanging match.

BTW, I think Chivas is Canadian and his grasp of English is very good. In fact, as good as yours.

Trying to take pot-shots at me or my use of English (which is at least on a par with yours) is a sort of admission that the nastiness charge stands. You haven't seemed able to answer it. Nor has Hayward. And as before, nastiness masks the true state of play, from which we all suffer (that is the real justification, if there should be one).

And as elsewhere, the patronising tone wont wash. Sunbeam. And after having tried the fancy-pants tack, you're trying the 'sniff...sniff' schoolyard variety.

I dont know why you got involved in the first place, other than to try and score some irrelevent points (which you have not).

I've made my point and de-railed this thread enough. Now you have some time to think up a suitably withering put-down (God please make it wittier than the last)