GBeebies

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

multitool

Pharaoh
To simplify things, remind us of your opinion of The Sun and its Edwards story.

On second thoughts, don't bother.

I, and no doubt other members will now be bored by this little spat.
Wow :laugh:

Quite apart from your pusillanimous retreat, invoking the putative boredom of others as motivation for it is quite the move. Very revealing.
 

Pale Rider

Veteran
Go on then - here's your posts in what became the Edwards thread.

You do make some uncomplimentary remarks about The Sun.

But the majority of your posts are simply having a pop at me.

Which indicates how your only, brainless, faux argument is 'shoot the messenger'.

https://ncap.cyclechat.net/search/155371/?t=post&c[thread]=192&c[users]=multitool&o=relevance

Wowser - ha-ha.
 

multitool

Pharaoh
In case you've conveniently forgotten, here is what you said:

- but you assert anything in The Sun about Edwards must be crap.

As you have just discovered, I made no assertions at all about the truthfulness or otherwise of TheSun's reporting on Edwards.

I commented on their hypocrisy, and that their motivations were not based on morality. I didn't say they were lying in the Edwards case.

Rather than dig deeper, especially having just proved to yourself that you were wrong, it would be better to just apologise, and retract, with your dignity intact.

This attempt at playing the victim is beneath you, or perhaps not.
 

Pale Rider

Veteran
In case you've conveniently forgotten, here is what you said:



As you have just discovered, I made no assertions at all about the truthfulness or otherwise of TheSun's reporting on Edwards.

Rather than dig deeper, especially having just proved to yourself that you were wrong, it would be better to just apologise, and retract, with your dignity intact.

This attempt at playing the victim is beneath you, or perhaps not.

Seven of your 23 posts in that thread are no more than digs at me.

That says it all.

I know you and some others on here regard attacking the poster as Oxford Union quality debating, but it really isn't.
 

multitool

Pharaoh
Seven of your 23 posts in that thread are no more than digs at me.

That says it all.

I know you and some others on here regard attacking the poster as Oxford Union quality debating, but it really isn't.

LOL

Disagreeing with you is not a "dig" at you. Don't be such a snowflake....especially since you've got form attacking me as "brainless", and now making false claims (Hardly the stuff of Oxford Union)

Still waiting for the apology, but I guess you don't possess it within you.
 

qigong chimp

Settler of gobby hash.
Well, I'm getting strong vibes of thin-skinned, pompous windbag who likes to pronounce on others, but squeals when his own less than courteous behaviour and intellectual failings are highlighted.

Amirite?

Fucking A
 

Mr Celine

Well-Known Member
Well, I'm getting strong vibes of thin-skinned, pompous windbag who likes to pronounce on others, but squeals when his own less than courteous behaviour and intellectual failings are highlighted.

Amirite?

I think it's a bit unfair to describe the Belford Bugle's cub reporter as thin skinned.

Apart from that you've nailed it.
 

Pale Rider

Veteran
Well, I'm getting strong vibes of thin-skinned, pompous windbag who likes to pronounce on others, but squeals when his own less than courteous behaviour and intellectual failings are highlighted.

Amirite?

Tool,

You made about 10 posts on Edwards, seven of which were a pop at me.

That is your only, brainless, interest.

If you think it bothers me, that's yet another thing you are wrong about.

You are keen to give it out, so don't squawk if you get some back.

Perhaps you only usually pick on people who won't fight back.

Wouldn't surprise me.

You'll quickly learn to lower your expectations.

And of course our resident psychobabble feminist has to join in.

Yet another one line snipe at me.

Can't you manage to post anything on topic, just once to show you can do it?

I think it's a bit unfair to describe the Belford Bugle's cub reporter as thin skinned.

Apart from that you've nailed it.

And yet another joins the pile on.

Are you another one of those who is frightened to make a post on topic?

Much easier just to follow others and have a pop at me.

Come on, do something, take part, mount an argument.

Is it so hard?
 

multitool

Pharaoh
Tool,

You made about 10 posts on Edwards, seven of which were a pop at me.

That is your only, brainless, interest.

If you think it bothers me, that's yet another thing you are wrong about.

I've just re-read my posts. I take objection to your use of the word "brainless" to describe people who do not agree with you. You then become aggressive. I laugh when Chimp calls you a "twatospheric arsêhole". Because it is funny. You try and attribute it to me. I point out that your posts are full of insult and arrogant condescension to others. Because they are.

It's not me having a tantrum here. It's you. And let's not forget that this is a massive diversion tactic to distract from your untrue attribution to me of something I never said and your failure to apologise and retract.
 
Last edited:

qigong chimp

Settler of gobby hash.
You'll be learning (or remembering if you've been around long enough) that Bronco Billy's MO is akin to those parasites who zombify their hosts. In time every active thread will shrink to the size of a provincial magistrates' court, and converge on the entirely un-vexed question of whether or not Bronco is a honking shit-funnel: "I'm not a honking shit-funnel, I'm a brainy stenographer."
Formerly these were 'resolved' when strangely suggestible mods - themselves zombified perhaps? - would ban people for stating the obvious.
Now there's no failsafe. Like an algal bloom asphyxiating a marine ecosystem, his grim work resumes.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom