am I headed for b3ta oblivion because I don't like you?I don't know you, so I couldn't possibly comment on whether you're really tedious, obnoxious or whatever. Your internet words are though.
I accept I'm getting concerned about things that shouldn't matter to me, I just dislike your attitude and have judged you based on the information available to me.
I won't be going mental either. I dislike what you post on this board. Nothing more.
(I accept I'm getting concerned about things that shouldn't matter to me, I just dislike your attitude and have judged you based on the information available to me.
I won't be going mental either. I dislike what you post on this board. Nothing more.
drbroon abloooobloobloo,
Fri 17 Oct 2008, 14:46,
archived)
You seem to be a little tied up in it thoughVery often I find replies to my posts from you which are knee jerks. I do worry - I do not want to be responsible for you getting all hung up on your problems with application of tone.
Maybe you should ignore me for a bit? You'll lose the responses to me, but you might be able to come back to my posts later without the negative connections you have developed?
(Maybe you should ignore me for a bit? You'll lose the responses to me, but you might be able to come back to my posts later without the negative connections you have developed?
LordManley twitter.com/LordManley,
Fri 17 Oct 2008, 14:53,
archived)
I seem to have got tied up in it?Perhaps you have misunderstood the application of tone in my post.
I'm really not that bothered. I don't spend any time thinking of you when I'm not giving you some deserved abuse.
Nice attempt at being patronising, wee man.
(I'm really not that bothered. I don't spend any time thinking of you when I'm not giving you some deserved abuse.
Nice attempt at being patronising, wee man.
drbroon abloooobloobloo,
Fri 17 Oct 2008, 14:59,
archived)
Whatever, it's your call.The speed of your replies (such as this morning) says that you do not think, as you say, which is why I was concerned about you.
Whatever has fixed such a bias in you that you hate without consideration in this way should be purged, for your sake.
Unless of course you are Scottish, in which case keep bottling it up. It's for the best.
(Whatever has fixed such a bias in you that you hate without consideration in this way should be purged, for your sake.
Unless of course you are Scottish, in which case keep bottling it up. It's for the best.
LordManley twitter.com/LordManley,
Fri 17 Oct 2008, 15:06,
archived)
I do think. I was in a bad mood this morning.I don't hate either. I dislike you a bit, taking previous evidence into account. I'm not putting you on ignore, because you do post decent pictures now and then when you're not being a dick.
As for your final comments there, about purging hatred, and generalising the psychology of a country, I'm afraid you're showing yourself up a bit.
I've put my point across. I'll try not to upset you again.
(As for your final comments there, about purging hatred, and generalising the psychology of a country, I'm afraid you're showing yourself up a bit.
I've put my point across. I'll try not to upset you again.
drbroon abloooobloobloo,
Fri 17 Oct 2008, 15:14,
archived)
As I say, you do have to try reading things in your own voice.How you can read the sentences: "Unless of course you are Scottish, in which case keep bottling it up. It's for the best." in a serious tone is, to be frank, a little beyond me.
It probably explains why you think I am rude though.
I am not going to stop being a dick though, it is kind of what b3ta is for. I was being enough of a dick to get banned before you even found us.
(It probably explains why you think I am rude though.
I am not going to stop being a dick though, it is kind of what b3ta is for. I was being enough of a dick to get banned before you even found us.
LordManley twitter.com/LordManley,
Fri 17 Oct 2008, 15:20,
archived)
I didn't say you should stop it.But you shouldn't be so surprised when people are dicks to you in return.
I think my interpretation of that sentence was quite accurate. I think your words might have been the problem there.
I also think that you are slightly deluded about your ability to convey "tone" in your writing. If I read it in my own voice, whether in a neutral, angry, happy, cheeky, surprised or disgusted tone, the meaning remains the same. As we were not currently engaged in a particularly friendly discourse, I understood the tone to be negative, irrelevant and pathetic, rather than jokey, cheeky, flirtatious, or whatever it was supposed to be.
Anyway, that's me. It was a fairly interesting discussion.
(I think my interpretation of that sentence was quite accurate. I think your words might have been the problem there.
I also think that you are slightly deluded about your ability to convey "tone" in your writing. If I read it in my own voice, whether in a neutral, angry, happy, cheeky, surprised or disgusted tone, the meaning remains the same. As we were not currently engaged in a particularly friendly discourse, I understood the tone to be negative, irrelevant and pathetic, rather than jokey, cheeky, flirtatious, or whatever it was supposed to be.
Anyway, that's me. It was a fairly interesting discussion.
drbroon abloooobloobloo,
Fri 17 Oct 2008, 15:33,
archived)
It's not so much my ability to convey tone, as the subject.Maybe it is just that I cannot imagine ever saying something that vitriolic seriously. I guess I am just nicer than some people you know.
( LordManley twitter.com/LordManley,
Fri 17 Oct 2008, 15:37,
archived)