After yesterday's broohaha with snicker martin, I got to thinking about it - who goes to the dungeon, why they're sent, who decides who goes, etc......
While on the subject, I realize that I failed to thank you for your invitation, Angel. Of course, you must have known that I "feared for my health" because of all those, er, "aids" that Dan left lying around there. (no offense Dan, but, well, they did sound, um, "unsafe"...?) Perhaps housekeeping has taken care of those though...:-)
Anyway, I still find it unnerving that so many of us have been sent there. And for what? For responding in defense of our investment. Why did I emphasize with italics the word "responding"? Because if there was a response, what were we responding to? Why, a dig from any one of the various and sundry nays that have parked themselves here, of course.
So, if the response was/is "cause" for a trip to the dungeon, why isn't it that what the response was to also "cause" for a trip to the dungeon? Interesting, huh?
It is a given, of course, that the nays would have their own, separate dungeon...:-)
Frustratingly though, Mr. SI Bob continues to fail to directly address such a query. |
