warren zevon rip wrote:
> Deuce Bigolo wrote:
>
> > As for playing spelling cop...once is too much
> > Number one reason for flaming wars on the net says it all
>
> So I am "spelling cop" for doing it once - yet you moan
> endlessly about o/t - but are wonderful?
Summed up beautifully
Trust me when I say you haven't even started to see me whinge let alone moan
I prefer cinderella boy ala caddyshack if you don' mind
>
> Why doncha just learn to spell if you don't like being told
> off?
>
>
NAH!!!!,Spellings over rated
jt's ?150k per week....obscene or what?!
-
Deuce Bigolo
- Posts: 9910
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: jt's ?150k per week....obscene or what?!
WZR WROTE: >>>
ERIC REPLIES: In YOUR opinion they're "great topics".
Which reflects your rather overly-inflated opinion of yourself. Fact is wazza, while you seem to have appointed yourself this forum's moral guardian and intellectual powerhouse, and see yourself as some kind of sophisticated wit and raconteur, most FPs here beg to differ and simply regard you as an arrogant twat. At least that appears to be the case, judging from comments that regularly crop up in numerous threads.
Not that you probably give a flying one - I'd imagine that in your professional life, the charges that you teach think you're a twat as well, so no doubt over time you've developed such a thick skin that any criticism of you is like water off a duck's back, you consider that there's only one valid world view (that of WZR) and that anyone who disagrees with you is simply "thick", and not worthy of posting in the same forum as you - probably not even worthy of breathing the same air that you yourself have only just finished with.
In short, you are utterly convinced of the veracity and infallibility of your opinions, and enjoy wallowing (via pseudo-intellectual, schoolmasterly posturing) in your own self-generated press. You're one of these people who invariably believes that they're right - even when they're wrong.
WZR WROTE: >>>
ERIC REPLIES: I'm actually going to be gracious and concede that point to you - that is indeed what the thread is / was about. My initial comment about you wandering off topic was - as far as that statement is concerned - perhaps a little hasty, as you do have this annoying habit of initiating knee-jerk reactions when you try to unnecessarily politicise things (see below) ....
WZR WROTE: >>>>
ERIC REPLIES: See what I mean?? You start waffling on about Africa, and the virtues of communism vs. capitalism. Yes, that statement is true: There are a lot of abjectly poor folk in Africa. We know that. We understand. But it's OFF TOPIC. We aren't talking about the starving Third World.
In any case wazza, there are children starving and living in squalor in the UK. Granted, not on anything like the scale of what's happening in Africa, but if you insist on bringing "starvation and poverty" into the equation, surely charity and social conscience start at home (but doubtless you believe that they're probably just the offspring of BNP-voting "wasters" and thus don't count - far better then to redistribute any wealth abroad and to open the floodgates to hordes of immigrants, eh wazza?).
WZR WROTE: >>>
ERIC REPLIES: No wazza. Accusing someone of pedantic, pontificating pedantic cuntery is what people say when dealing with pedantic, pontificating cunts.
I'm quite happy - and certainly able - to argue with you intellectually, intelligently and articulately on pretty much any subject you might care to raise. As indeed are others here.
But in your arrogance, you seem to think that you're the sole custodian of these virtues on this forum, wrongly believing also that having "the last word" means you've "won the argument" (I know sometimes I myself just give up with you - not because or any "intellectual superiority" on your part, simply because I just can't be arsed any more as debating with you becomes like banging your head against a tree, so blinkered and dogmatic are your views).
WZR WROTE: >>>
ERIC REPLIES: Wrong again, wazza. Plain wrong (not even "underly correct").
Being a pedant has nothing at all to do with being "overly right" (your arrogance truly is staggering). The definition of a pedant (look it up!) is someone who relies too much on academic learning, or who is concerned chiefly with **insignificant** and petty details. It's also an archaic word for a schoolteacher. So - bang on the nail for WZR on all counts, then.
- Eric
ERIC REPLIES: In YOUR opinion they're "great topics".
Which reflects your rather overly-inflated opinion of yourself. Fact is wazza, while you seem to have appointed yourself this forum's moral guardian and intellectual powerhouse, and see yourself as some kind of sophisticated wit and raconteur, most FPs here beg to differ and simply regard you as an arrogant twat. At least that appears to be the case, judging from comments that regularly crop up in numerous threads.
Not that you probably give a flying one - I'd imagine that in your professional life, the charges that you teach think you're a twat as well, so no doubt over time you've developed such a thick skin that any criticism of you is like water off a duck's back, you consider that there's only one valid world view (that of WZR) and that anyone who disagrees with you is simply "thick", and not worthy of posting in the same forum as you - probably not even worthy of breathing the same air that you yourself have only just finished with.
In short, you are utterly convinced of the veracity and infallibility of your opinions, and enjoy wallowing (via pseudo-intellectual, schoolmasterly posturing) in your own self-generated press. You're one of these people who invariably believes that they're right - even when they're wrong.
WZR WROTE: >>>
ERIC REPLIES: I'm actually going to be gracious and concede that point to you - that is indeed what the thread is / was about. My initial comment about you wandering off topic was - as far as that statement is concerned - perhaps a little hasty, as you do have this annoying habit of initiating knee-jerk reactions when you try to unnecessarily politicise things (see below) ....
WZR WROTE: >>>>
ERIC REPLIES: See what I mean?? You start waffling on about Africa, and the virtues of communism vs. capitalism. Yes, that statement is true: There are a lot of abjectly poor folk in Africa. We know that. We understand. But it's OFF TOPIC. We aren't talking about the starving Third World.
In any case wazza, there are children starving and living in squalor in the UK. Granted, not on anything like the scale of what's happening in Africa, but if you insist on bringing "starvation and poverty" into the equation, surely charity and social conscience start at home (but doubtless you believe that they're probably just the offspring of BNP-voting "wasters" and thus don't count - far better then to redistribute any wealth abroad and to open the floodgates to hordes of immigrants, eh wazza?).
WZR WROTE: >>>
ERIC REPLIES: No wazza. Accusing someone of pedantic, pontificating pedantic cuntery is what people say when dealing with pedantic, pontificating cunts.
I'm quite happy - and certainly able - to argue with you intellectually, intelligently and articulately on pretty much any subject you might care to raise. As indeed are others here.
But in your arrogance, you seem to think that you're the sole custodian of these virtues on this forum, wrongly believing also that having "the last word" means you've "won the argument" (I know sometimes I myself just give up with you - not because or any "intellectual superiority" on your part, simply because I just can't be arsed any more as debating with you becomes like banging your head against a tree, so blinkered and dogmatic are your views).
WZR WROTE: >>>
ERIC REPLIES: Wrong again, wazza. Plain wrong (not even "underly correct").
Being a pedant has nothing at all to do with being "overly right" (your arrogance truly is staggering). The definition of a pedant (look it up!) is someone who relies too much on academic learning, or who is concerned chiefly with **insignificant** and petty details. It's also an archaic word for a schoolteacher. So - bang on the nail for WZR on all counts, then.
- Eric
-
bristolian
- Posts: 269
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: jt's ?150k per week....obscene or what?!
Actually its 'you're' not 'your'- glasses and stones Herr Bigolo. And I will mention by team's name if I like, thank you.
-
Deuce Bigolo
- Posts: 9910
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: jt's ?150k per week....obscene or what?!
I never said you couldn't,did I?
I was just merely pointing out the vagaries(spelling?) of Kid/Adolscent supporters
Afterall we are living in the age of instant gratification
The local teams are on a hiding to nothing even if they are successful in their own division
God help those that make it to the EPL and struggle to be competitive
Its not by accident that those teams that get the most media exposure are the ones that seem to have the most supporter bases/clubs around the world.Pure marketing/brainwashing IMHO
I can understand ex-pats setting them up but the rest are just driven by the teams touring and the kids jumping on the band wagon
I was just merely pointing out the vagaries(spelling?) of Kid/Adolscent supporters
Afterall we are living in the age of instant gratification
The local teams are on a hiding to nothing even if they are successful in their own division
God help those that make it to the EPL and struggle to be competitive
Its not by accident that those teams that get the most media exposure are the ones that seem to have the most supporter bases/clubs around the world.Pure marketing/brainwashing IMHO
I can understand ex-pats setting them up but the rest are just driven by the teams touring and the kids jumping on the band wagon
Re: jt's ?150k per week....obscene or what?!
WZR wrote: >>>
ERIC REPLIES: Well that's as may be, wazzock.
The flipside however being that for most folk who contributed (and I think I even commented myself), it might well be like pondering the absence of the boorish, loud-mouthed twat at the bar down the local. Or the opinionated buffoon at a social gathering.
Along the lines of someone commenting "quiet in here tonight", with others then sharing their thoughts.
It's not necessarily because they're missing you or pining with heavy heart for your return.
WZR wrote: >>>>
ERIC REPLIES: Perhaps.
But unlike your good self, I feel no desperate need to be regarded as the / a mainstay of some Internet forum, or to be the person with the highest number of posts or whatever it is you're apparently aspiring to be.
I drop by here from time to time, look though the threads, comment if I have something to say on a subject, and move on if I don't. If people "notice" me and / or agree with what I say, then fine. If not, well that's okay as well. It's no major deal either way. I certainly don't feel the need to start daft threads just to draw attention to myself - which is something you do all the time.
Unlike in your own case, the "egafd o/t forum" doesn't constitute a major part of my social life. Maybe you need to get out more. Take up a hobby or something.
WZR wrote: >>
ERIC REPLIES: But apparently it's okay for YOU to use Anglo-Saxon terminology and insult people, and still claim intelligence and intellect is it?
One rule for WZR, one for the rest of us, it would seem (see also below).
WZR wrote: >>>>
ERIC REPLIES: Yet again you're applying double standards. Many times you've trumpeted your own intelligence and intellect. And yet when someone else suggests they're also intelligent, you say that it's "arrogant".
WZR wrote: >>>
ERIC REPLIES (chuckling to self): That's a good one - considering that **you yourself** even described me as "quite clever" in the "Brown's Long Term Vision" a thread some weeks back (although you also were careful to describe yourself as "very clever" so as not to concede too much). Check the thread if you think I'm pulling your chain or if your memory needs refreshing.
Even though I disagree with much of what you write, I actually DO think you're quite intelligent.
It's just a shame that that this attribute isn't tempered a little by qualities such as humility and modesty. Even a little of these things would go a long way.
Unfortunately though, you seem to regard intelligence as a license to exercise unbridled pompousness, arrogance and even rudeness - such as calling people who say something you don't agree with "thick" - or even "thick cunt" (see same thread).
Yes you're intelligent. But you're by no means the ONLY intelligent FP here. Or even the most articulate. You're certainly not the "most intelligent" (probably no such thing anyway, given that there are different kinds of intelligence, and that in all our respective individual cases, there are always going to be areas in which we're quite knowledgeable, and others in which we're less so).
WZR wrote: >>>
ERIC REPLIES: Just fighting fire with fire, wazza !wink!.
WZR wrote: >>>
ERIC REPLIES: Not at all - arrogance being your department, not mine !cool!.
- Eric
ERIC REPLIES: Well that's as may be, wazzock.
The flipside however being that for most folk who contributed (and I think I even commented myself), it might well be like pondering the absence of the boorish, loud-mouthed twat at the bar down the local. Or the opinionated buffoon at a social gathering.
Along the lines of someone commenting "quiet in here tonight", with others then sharing their thoughts.
It's not necessarily because they're missing you or pining with heavy heart for your return.
WZR wrote: >>>>
ERIC REPLIES: Perhaps.
But unlike your good self, I feel no desperate need to be regarded as the / a mainstay of some Internet forum, or to be the person with the highest number of posts or whatever it is you're apparently aspiring to be.
I drop by here from time to time, look though the threads, comment if I have something to say on a subject, and move on if I don't. If people "notice" me and / or agree with what I say, then fine. If not, well that's okay as well. It's no major deal either way. I certainly don't feel the need to start daft threads just to draw attention to myself - which is something you do all the time.
Unlike in your own case, the "egafd o/t forum" doesn't constitute a major part of my social life. Maybe you need to get out more. Take up a hobby or something.
WZR wrote: >>
ERIC REPLIES: But apparently it's okay for YOU to use Anglo-Saxon terminology and insult people, and still claim intelligence and intellect is it?
One rule for WZR, one for the rest of us, it would seem (see also below).
WZR wrote: >>>>
ERIC REPLIES: Yet again you're applying double standards. Many times you've trumpeted your own intelligence and intellect. And yet when someone else suggests they're also intelligent, you say that it's "arrogant".
WZR wrote: >>>
ERIC REPLIES (chuckling to self): That's a good one - considering that **you yourself** even described me as "quite clever" in the "Brown's Long Term Vision" a thread some weeks back (although you also were careful to describe yourself as "very clever" so as not to concede too much). Check the thread if you think I'm pulling your chain or if your memory needs refreshing.
Even though I disagree with much of what you write, I actually DO think you're quite intelligent.
It's just a shame that that this attribute isn't tempered a little by qualities such as humility and modesty. Even a little of these things would go a long way.
Unfortunately though, you seem to regard intelligence as a license to exercise unbridled pompousness, arrogance and even rudeness - such as calling people who say something you don't agree with "thick" - or even "thick cunt" (see same thread).
Yes you're intelligent. But you're by no means the ONLY intelligent FP here. Or even the most articulate. You're certainly not the "most intelligent" (probably no such thing anyway, given that there are different kinds of intelligence, and that in all our respective individual cases, there are always going to be areas in which we're quite knowledgeable, and others in which we're less so).
WZR wrote: >>>
ERIC REPLIES: Just fighting fire with fire, wazza !wink!.
WZR wrote: >>>
ERIC REPLIES: Not at all - arrogance being your department, not mine !cool!.
- Eric
Re: jt's ?150k per week....obscene or what?!
Flat_Eric wrote:
> Fact is wazza, while you seem to have appointed yourself this
> forum's moral guardian
I noticed that many months ago F_E. He agreed with my view, so much so that he used it as part of his signature for a while.
> Fact is wazza, while you seem to have appointed yourself this
> forum's moral guardian
I noticed that many months ago F_E. He agreed with my view, so much so that he used it as part of his signature for a while.