Shorts - you said you were through here. I guess I'm just too enticing and you need to provide a few more malapropisms in support of your theories, just joking of course.
In any event, going back to the original conversation here. You accused me of "brutally attacking" you. Yet, you failed to present any evidence whatsoever, other than I joked about "waiting" and then didn't respond to a couple of posts. Your own posts showed that perhaps you are a bit thin skinned and are too quick to complain about attacks with respect to posts that are much less attack posts than your own.
Then you claimed a brutal attack resulted from a thorough and articulate response on my part to a post. You had no specifics so I had to generalize.
Now, you are saying I twist your posts, but, fail to provide an example, other than my comment about not loading the boat. I quote your words, I comment where appropriate and feel that most readers agree. It really seems like nitpicking and trying to dig out of a hole. It may be easier to just throw away the shovel and stop digging.
I have no problem with negative posts. If I ask for substance, the poster should not feel attacked. That's the way boards are supposed to be. After all, when a poster says, "going to the moon tomorrow" or "chart says it's going to be a big winner," don't you ask for substance?
In any event, we've probably exhausted the subject. I don't think I can convince you that you are "wrong" even if I wished to do so, and, you haven't proven me "wrong" despite your claims.
:-) |
