Oh no!! Brexit not going quite as well as hoped

[matticus]

Who has to respond to whom??

I propose a simple rule:
If you are asked the same question more than 5 times without replying (or 4 times by the same person), then you must resign from NACA.
No cheating by answering a different question!

 

[icowden]

Is someone talking about others again, without the bottle to reply to them personally.

typical of your posts really.

is someone being unnecessarily rude and confrontational again, without the bottle to justify their arguments?

typical of your posts really...

Can we grow up now and go back to actually discussing things?

 

[jowwy]

I propose a simple rule:
If you are asked the same question more than 5 times without replying (or 4 times by the same person), then you must resign from NACA.
No cheating by answering a different question!

What if the question is absolute bollocks and doesnt deserve a reply?? Or are members trying to set rules to justify their own rhetoric and nonsense

 

[jowwy]

is someone being unnecessarily rude and confrontational again, without the bottle to justify their arguments?

typical of your posts really...

Can we grow up now and go back to actually discussing things?

I would say its rude to talk about someone, without naming them…….but hey, your one of the same bunch, its like the defenders of boris in here, the cabinet got nothing on some of you

 

[mudsticks]

I propose a simple rule:
If you are asked the same question more than 5 times without replying (or 4 times by the same person), then you must resign from NACA.
No cheating by answering a different question!

Sounds ok to me..

You'd probs need a seven* paragraph limit to the answer from some of us though.

So long as we're not obliged to reply to those people we have on ignore on account of their being particulary rude and abrasive 👍🏼🌈💜💚

* Appendices and digressions notwithstanding 🤔

 

[jowwy]

Sounds ok to me..

You'd probs need a seven* paragraph limit to the answer from some of us though.

So long as we're not obliged to reply to those people we have on ignore on account of their being party rude and abrasive 👍🏼🌈💜💚

* Appendices and digressions notwithstanding 🤔

Then dont talk about the people you have on ignore…..cause thats just as rude

 

[newfhouse]

Or are members trying to set rules to justify their own rhetoric

Must rhetoric always be justified?

 

[icowden]

Then dont talk about the people you have on ignore…..cause thats just as rude

Um - I think @mudsticks is ignoring you.

Which part of "ignore" are you having difficulty with?

 

[deptfordmarmoset]

Must rhetoric always be justified?

That's one of those trick questions, isn't it?

 

[icowden]

I propose a simple rule:
If you are asked the same question more than 5 times without replying (or 4 times by the same person), then you must resign from NACA.
No cheating by answering a different question!

We could just have a consenus to send the offender to coventry (mass ignore!).
To be honest I have now become bored with jowwy and have put him on ignore. First time ever for an ignore!

 

[AndyRM]

You just dont like egyptian footballers earning more than white footballers, even though hes won tons more trophies than they have………

You're the one bringing race into this, not me.

 

[AndyRM]

Said by someone who should know. 😉

Fully admit to being a strange being. And loving it.

 

[matticus]

What if the question is absolute bollocks and doesnt deserve a reply?? Or are members trying to set rules to justify their own rhetoric and nonsense

Try asking me another 3 times ;-)

 

[winjim]

Must rhetoric always be justified?

If you read Cicero, you'll find that rhetoric is justified and ancient.

 

[matticus]

That's one of those trick questions, isn't it?

Doesn't matter - you MUST answer !!!