what u think of one of these

Angilion · 3 Dec 2009 at 03:11

newbiejim said:
You call me a tool for what?, I thinkyou have went too far and most reasonable folks may well agree. Honestly you surely wouldn't show this type of aggression in a real life setting?,

I explained why. You even quoted the explanation in your reply. Aggression? You asked for comments. I commented in a manner that was quite restrained under the circumstances.

newbiejim · 3 Dec 2009 at 10:18

Azza said:
See what I did there?

Apparently you missed one, do YOU now deserve berating? Some may say you would deserve more as surely you are displaying a level of idiocy previously unreached in this thread.

newbiejim · 3 Dec 2009 at 10:23

Angilion said:
I explained why. You even quoted the explanation in your reply. Aggression? You asked for comments. I commented in a manner that was quite restrained under the circumstances.

It is my opinion that any fair minded person reading the entirety of this thread would agree that you sir were too aggressive all things considered.

Megahurtz400 · 3 Dec 2009 at 10:27

You guys are all stoopid

newbiejim · 3 Dec 2009 at 10:52

Angilion said:
So you dumb down and mangle a beautiful language deliberately in addition to doing so through incompetence.

That makes it worse, not better.

The lack of a question mark is probably the least important of the errors in the subject title.

You want a comment? OK, I'll oblige. You're a tool.

Incidentally, earlier in the thread you started a sentence with "So".As I read the sentence in question something in my tool-like primitive brain alerted me that all may not be well with the way the aforementioned sentence flowed.It just didn't sound right, it seemed a bit I dunno kind of clunky and less than perfectly structured.I though to myself, no surely a tinterweb bully so clearly erudite and berating me for such matters would SURELY never be culpable of making a slight error.Well whaddya know it seems that there is certainly doubt about whether starting a sentence with "So" is acceptable.

Link

You and your cohorts rounded on myself to a degree that was a tad unfair in my opinion.You personally were too aggressive.Now how hilarious is it that you, who have defined the terms of engagement for this petty skirmish have transgressed your very own protocols.I would submit that any fair minded person reading the entirety of this thread would come to the conclusion that you are now looking less than smart.Bear in mind that there only needs to be some doubt about your usage of "So" to qualify you for humiliation as you clearly think any minor grammar/typo errors are worthy of mention.

Is it "cheque m8" I say now?

mrk · 3 Dec 2009 at 11:02

You can start with "So". In fact many books I have read has had sentences started with that word, you had to Google this?

newbiejim · 3 Dec 2009 at 11:12

mrk said:
You can start with "So". In fact many books I have read has had sentences started with that word, you had to Google this?

Read my post, surely a pre-requisite of critique when you being so critical? However for you I'll clarify, there IS doubt about whether this is proper usage. Now like I said if you are boorishly rounding on folks unfairly for such matters surely you should yourself be avoiding improper use of the beautiful language.

newbiejim · 3 Dec 2009 at 11:18

mrk said:
You can start with "So". In fact many books I have read has had sentences started with that word, you had to Google this?

You also fail to acknowledge the bigger issues here. The fact that rude agressive behaviour has been dispensed unfairly by a few, this rounding on people in such a manner is certainly not good natured. Surely this issue is more important than the issues you highlight?

I would submit that fair minded folks will judge me in a better light than those who have been so keen to be "clever".

newbiejim · 3 Dec 2009 at 11:20

mrk said:
You can start with "So". In fact many books I have read has had sentences started with that word, you had to Google this?

LMAO, the god of come uppance has smiled today

, any more?

bledd · 3 Dec 2009 at 11:21

What the hell

Dark_Angel · 3 Dec 2009 at 11:28

I think the bickering is getting a little... pointless now guys?

Knubje · 3 Dec 2009 at 11:29

So-far-off-the-beaten-track-thread is far off the beaten track.

In fact, I'm even doubting the beaten track in the first place.

[TW]Fox · 3 Dec 2009 at 11:30

newbiejim said:
Is it "cheque m8" I say now?

No, a cheque is a method of payment, I think you mean 'Checkmate'.

To be honest your sudden discovery of near perfect grammar makes your original posts even more daft, I had a bit of sympathy for you before but now I'm left wondering why you pretended to be illiterate.

newbiejim · 3 Dec 2009 at 11:36

Dark_Angel said:
I think the bickering is getting a little... pointless now guys?

You mean as pointless as the incessant haranguing by the punctuation police? Surely I`m playing their game and no one pulled THEM up

Dark_Angel · 3 Dec 2009 at 11:41

newbiejim said:
You mean as pointless as the incessant haranguing by the punctuation police? Surely I`m playing their game and no one pulled THEM up

I'm talking of both. Your first post was difficult to read, and I'm not surprised it got negative comments, but now the thread is just turning in to bickering.

newbiejim · 3 Dec 2009 at 11:42

[TW]Fox;15448618 said:
No, a cheque is a method of payment, I think you mean 'Checkmate'.

Hmmm,sarcasm?

[TW]Fox;15448618 said:
To be honest your sudden discovery of near perfect grammar makes your original posts even more daft, I had a bit of sympathy for you before but now I'm left wondering why you pretended to be illiterate.

Nice of you to deign to acknowledge your sympathy for me. I duly touch my forelock.

In addition, why omit to mention the larger issues I detailed in an earlier post to highlight what seems a small moot point?

newbiejim · 3 Dec 2009 at 11:47

Dark_Angel said:
I'm talking of both. Your first post was difficult to read, and I'm not surprised it got negative comments, but now the thread is just turning in to bickering.

I ashamedly agree that my OP was lazy/messy and poor, get this, that is my crime.

Now WHY are you failing to propely decry what was way more than negative comments. The haranguers went way further than I have yet I see no real condemnation from the forum cognoscenti. Really, if anyone wants to be truly fair here then surely this needs to be said.

Dark_Angel · 3 Dec 2009 at 11:49

newbiejim said:
I ashamedly agree that my OP was lazy/messy and poor, get this, that is my crime.

Now WHY are you failing to propely decry what was way more than negative comments. The haranguers went way further than I have yet I see no real condemnation from the forum cognoscenti. Really, if anyone wants to be truly fair here then surely this needs to be said.

I've said both are going to far, but basically the thread is turning in to a massive argument.

You've demonstrated that you can spell and have a grasp over the english language. This is an argument that no one can win, just a pointless thread war...

newbiejim · 3 Dec 2009 at 12:30

Dark_Angel said:
I've said both are going to far, but basically the thread is turning in to a massive argument.

You've demonstrated that you can spell and have a grasp over the english language. This is an argument that no one can win, just a pointless thread war...

I agree with you, and I only highlight your typo/error to illustrate that this stuff is easy.

I would also like to ask you (and any other worthy forumites) a pointed question "Do you agree that me being called a tool is more worthy of condemnation than the pettiness dispensed by this gang?"

I ask this because you and others seem to shy away from criticising what I see as the bigger issue.

soapboxstuart · 3 Dec 2009 at 12:35

Did you ever get an actual answer to the original question?
I have to say the comments following the original post are simply UNBELIEVABLE.
Of course people understood what you were saying, and btw Angilion your comments were HUGELY aggressive and should probably be reported imo. Imagine getting so upset over something so trivial?

In the words of Elbert Hubbard (a rather more famous wordsmith than you)

'If you can't answer a man's arguments, all is not lost; you can still call him vile names'