| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch 10:53 - Sep 17 with 36136 views | Darran |
Did any of you hear Jason Price being called a lazy black bastard with sheer regularity?
It's a no from me. [Post edited 17 Sep 2017 17:27]
|  |
| |  |
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 12:44 - Sep 21 with 652 views | vetchonian |
Never mind the fans comments it is alleged acertin managers team talk was jsur kick it forward for the c**n to chase regarding a certian Steve Mardenbrough |  |
| |
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 12:46 - Sep 21 with 652 views | E20Jack |
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 12:41 - Sep 21 by costalotta |
I wouldn't know as don't know him so cannot judge him personally or his character. I say that with respect to the fella you refer to.
So, as that stands from my perspective it's hearsay. It's 2nd had at best.
It's no tirade. It's just a set of comments, observations, corrections along with some questions of your waffle, I mean posts.
Your still wrong by the way. |
But that is your lack of understanding of what hearsay means. Hearsay is second hand information. So if he said "my friend said he used to go with someone who abused Price every week" then that is hearsay. You cannot redefine words to suit yourself.
What we are discussing is first hand, witness accounts. He clearly stated that HE was the witness to it. So if you say I am wrong not only would you have to accuse this man of lying (and the others), but also be able to prove so.
If you do not think he is lying then you agree with me. Good man, we got there in the end.
Welcome to page 14. [Post edited 21 Sep 2017 12:58]
|  |
| |
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 12:58 - Sep 21 with 623 views | costalotta |
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 12:46 - Sep 21 by E20Jack |
But that is your lack of understanding of what hearsay means. Hearsay is second hand information. So if he said "my friend said he used to go with someone who abused Price every week" then that is hearsay. You cannot redefine words to suit yourself.
What we are discussing is first hand, witness accounts. He clearly stated that HE was the witness to it. So if you say I am wrong not only would you have to accuse this man of lying (and the others), but also be able to prove so.
If you do not think he is lying then you agree with me. Good man, we got there in the end.
Welcome to page 14. [Post edited 21 Sep 2017 12:58]
|
he said he heard it, you said you heard it. Without any evidence of note it's hearsay. Plus the fact from him to you and onto me means it's by your definition it's hearsay. Then there is the north bank 15... okay, good luck with that.
As has been asked , where's the evidence? It's just your word and some guy on an Internet forum, good luck with that, again.
Your right it's cut ad dried and you've lost and you'd fail in very way imaginable.
So, you are still wrong and no closer to claiming any type of victory your small mind requires to disperse your anger and resentment.
#megotnoevidence, #northbank15helpme, #yougotnothing |  | | |
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 13:05 - Sep 21 with 613 views | Cooperman |
LOL. |  |
| |
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 13:15 - Sep 21 with 603 views | E20Jack |
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 12:58 - Sep 21 by costalotta |
he said he heard it, you said you heard it. Without any evidence of note it's hearsay. Plus the fact from him to you and onto me means it's by your definition it's hearsay. Then there is the north bank 15... okay, good luck with that.
As has been asked , where's the evidence? It's just your word and some guy on an Internet forum, good luck with that, again.
Your right it's cut ad dried and you've lost and you'd fail in very way imaginable.
So, you are still wrong and no closer to claiming any type of victory your small mind requires to disperse your anger and resentment.
#megotnoevidence, #northbank15helpme, #yougotnothing |
That is the evidence. It is evidence admissable in a court of law such is its strength and is the first thing historical researchers will look for as evidence other than accounts written at the time of the event.
Again hearsay is not first hand accounts. Hearsay is second hand accounts or worse. Second hand accounts are defined as the author not experiencing an event him/herself. So by definition you are incorrect as all accounts discussed are regarding he subject of that post personally experiencing it. That is not my definition, it is THE definition.
Us discussing those documented first hand accounts do not make it hearsay as the account is documented. That is again your misunderstanding of terms coming into play again. It is like the prosecution going over witness statements, that doesn't then become hearsay, it becomes people discussing first hand accounts hence why they are relied upon in court cases.
It is completely cut and dry. So unless you come out and claim that these people are lying in their first hand accounts and have evidence to show why, then you simply agree with me, anything else will just be silly playground rubbish, completely meaningless.
I hope your return to the tirade of ridiculousness and frustrated hashtagging is the penny finally dropping for you. [Post edited 21 Sep 2017 13:22]
| |
| |
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 13:22 - Sep 21 with 590 views | costalotta |
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 13:15 - Sep 21 by E20Jack |
That is the evidence. It is evidence admissable in a court of law such is its strength and is the first thing historical researchers will look for as evidence other than accounts written at the time of the event.
Again hearsay is not first hand accounts. Hearsay is second hand accounts or worse. Second hand accounts are defined as the author not experiencing an event him/herself. So by definition you are incorrect as all accounts discussed are regarding he subject of that post personally experiencing it. That is not my definition, it is THE definition.
Us discussing those documented first hand accounts do not make it hearsay as the account is documented. That is again your misunderstanding of terms coming into play again. It is like the prosecution going over witness statements, that doesn't then become hearsay, it becomes people discussing first hand accounts hence why they are relied upon in court cases.
It is completely cut and dry. So unless you come out and claim that these people are lying in their first hand accounts and have evidence to show why, then you simply agree with me, anything else will just be silly playground rubbish, completely meaningless.
I hope your return to the tirade of ridiculousness and frustrated hashtagging is the penny finally dropping for you. [Post edited 21 Sep 2017 13:22]
|
There you have it.
You must now the difference between first and second hand and thus younnow know you lost and are finally up to speed. I would say top man, but your no.
Oh, as we back to evidence and court again, you also must accepts going on with your evidence as you call it you'd be laughted at and probably held in contempt for wasting the courts time. If of course you could manage to get the CPS to prosecute, which again they wouldn't. But if they read your posts you might end up committed.
All the usual hash tags !
Oh, what's it feel like to know wrong? Do you find it a relief so you can now rebuild your life. | | | |
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 13:24 - Sep 21 with 587 views | E20Jack |
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 13:22 - Sep 21 by costalotta |
There you have it.
You must now the difference between first and second hand and thus younnow know you lost and are finally up to speed. I would say top man, but your no.
Oh, as we back to evidence and court again, you also must accepts going on with your evidence as you call it you'd be laughted at and probably held in contempt for wasting the courts time. If of course you could manage to get the CPS to prosecute, which again they wouldn't. But if they read your posts you might end up committed.
All the usual hash tags !
Oh, what's it feel like to know wrong? Do you find it a relief so you can now rebuild your life. |
Absolutely do understand the difference yes. Hence why the fact we have 5 or 6 first hand accounts proves you are talking a load of frustrated nonsense and at this juncture suggests that the event in question did indeed happen... Unless you can prove otherwise or indeed claim that these accounts are from people who are lying about it.
Prosecutions have nothing to do with it, we have no criminal party so its a moot point. The court example is to show the strength of evidence associated with first hand witness statements and the fact that a counrt cannot accept hearsay yet accepts statements such as the ones we have, proving that your understanding of hearsay is indeed incorrect (as if that needed pointing out).
As we are not prosecuting anyonehowever and are researching historical events 20 years ago then we also see that first hand witness accounts are of paramount importance in understanding a situation. So again, unless you can prove that these witness statements are lying then the picture of what happened is pretty clear, and that is corroborated by the first hand accounts.
Over to you. [Post edited 21 Sep 2017 13:29]
| |
| |
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 13:50 - Sep 21 with 558 views | costalotta |
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 13:24 - Sep 21 by E20Jack |
Absolutely do understand the difference yes. Hence why the fact we have 5 or 6 first hand accounts proves you are talking a load of frustrated nonsense and at this juncture suggests that the event in question did indeed happen... Unless you can prove otherwise or indeed claim that these accounts are from people who are lying about it.
Prosecutions have nothing to do with it, we have no criminal party so its a moot point. The court example is to show the strength of evidence associated with first hand witness statements and the fact that a counrt cannot accept hearsay yet accepts statements such as the ones we have, proving that your understanding of hearsay is indeed incorrect (as if that needed pointing out).
As we are not prosecuting anyonehowever and are researching historical events 20 years ago then we also see that first hand witness accounts are of paramount importance in understanding a situation. So again, unless you can prove that these witness statements are lying then the picture of what happened is pretty clear, and that is corroborated by the first hand accounts.
Over to you. [Post edited 21 Sep 2017 13:29]
|
Hahaha.
Still wrong and wer now back to the long and boring regurgitatation posts. Round and round you go and easily made to look a fool.
Your brought it up as evidence and got schooled on that.
You brought up that you must be right and said would bound to win in court. You.
Your brought up court and you were schooled on that
Oh yeah and you brought up you being supported bt then north bank 5 or 15 (can't remember) first hand accounts but totally ignore every one else. I'm calling you out! Prove it beyond doubt!
You brought up historical research primary blah yada yada and have been schooled on that.
You still cannot grasp complaicated nor simple things that others post, again schooled.
Your attempted to bring maths into it and made a complete fool of yourself.
You accused others of lying and or corroborating, there's no need as the common denominator is you. Again made a fool of yourself.
You've attempted multiple times to change the course of the thread, again you've failed.
You've made countless accusation regarding anger, frustration etc etc. And you couldn't have been more wrong.
Your a wrong obsessive who's been schooled.
#megotnotevidence, #NB15pleasehelpme | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 13:58 - Sep 21 with 550 views | E20Jack |
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 13:50 - Sep 21 by costalotta |
Hahaha.
Still wrong and wer now back to the long and boring regurgitatation posts. Round and round you go and easily made to look a fool.
Your brought it up as evidence and got schooled on that.
You brought up that you must be right and said would bound to win in court. You.
Your brought up court and you were schooled on that
Oh yeah and you brought up you being supported bt then north bank 5 or 15 (can't remember) first hand accounts but totally ignore every one else. I'm calling you out! Prove it beyond doubt!
You brought up historical research primary blah yada yada and have been schooled on that.
You still cannot grasp complaicated nor simple things that others post, again schooled.
Your attempted to bring maths into it and made a complete fool of yourself.
You accused others of lying and or corroborating, there's no need as the common denominator is you. Again made a fool of yourself.
You've attempted multiple times to change the course of the thread, again you've failed.
You've made countless accusation regarding anger, frustration etc etc. And you couldn't have been more wrong.
Your a wrong obsessive who's been schooled.
#megotnotevidence, #NB15pleasehelpme |
Yes you are still wrong. I have no option but to regurgitate what I have been trying to teach you for 2 days as you clearly still are confused by these notions. I will happily go 100+ pages rehashing everything I have said, I am truly and utterly relentless.
1) Yes i brought it up as evidence. It is first hand evidence. The strength of which is so important that it is often what determines the outcome of court cases.
2) I never said I was bound to win in court, you made that up. To win in court you would have to have a suspect. If there was ever such a court to ascertain whether an event did or did not take place, then yes I would win hands down, unquestionably.
3) Yes I brought up court. This was to show your lack of understanding between first hand witness accounts and hearsay. A concept you still struggle with even though I have given you the actual definitions.
4) Yes I am saying my statement has been supported by others. They are not ignoring anybody else, I completely believe those who have said they didnt hear or cannot specifically recall. To think everyone would hear such things would be utterly ridiculous in such a large space where people cannot physically hear every call made of hundreds or thousands of simulatanious voices.
5) yes I brought up historical research. This was because you were confused with the court scenario and assumed because there would be no prosecution (as there is no criminal accused) then it means the event did not take place. Needless to say that needs to explaining how ridiculous that view is so suggested we move from an area we are not in (nobody is going to court) and instead focus on what we are doing - historical research.
6) I then taught you that in our scenario, historical research of an event, we have 5 or 6 primary first hand witness accounts of what happened, including one account in which he indeed knows one of the constant abusers - among others that do not recall or did not hear personally. That is pretty damning in favour of the event occuring. So far you have been unable to show otherwise. But I am hoping you come up with something at least a little coherent in the near future, preferably before we hit page 20.
Over to you. [Post edited 21 Sep 2017 14:13]
| |
| |
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 14:13 - Sep 21 with 533 views | costalotta |
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 13:58 - Sep 21 by E20Jack |
Yes you are still wrong. I have no option but to regurgitate what I have been trying to teach you for 2 days as you clearly still are confused by these notions. I will happily go 100+ pages rehashing everything I have said, I am truly and utterly relentless.
1) Yes i brought it up as evidence. It is first hand evidence. The strength of which is so important that it is often what determines the outcome of court cases.
2) I never said I was bound to win in court, you made that up. To win in court you would have to have a suspect. If there was ever such a court to ascertain whether an event did or did not take place, then yes I would win hands down, unquestionably.
3) Yes I brought up court. This was to show your lack of understanding between first hand witness accounts and hearsay. A concept you still struggle with even though I have given you the actual definitions.
4) Yes I am saying my statement has been supported by others. They are not ignoring anybody else, I completely believe those who have said they didnt hear or cannot specifically recall. To think everyone would hear such things would be utterly ridiculous in such a large space where people cannot physically hear every call made of hundreds or thousands of simulatanious voices.
5) yes I brought up historical research. This was because you were confused with the court scenario and assumed because there would be no prosecution (as there is no criminal accused) then it means the event did not take place. Needless to say that needs to explaining how ridiculous that view is so suggested we move from an area we are not in (nobody is going to court) and instead focus on what we are doing - historical research.
6) I then taught you that in our scenario, historical research of an event, we have 5 or 6 primary first hand witness accounts of what happened, including one account in which he indeed knows one of the constant abusers - among others that do not recall or did not hear personally. That is pretty damning in favour of the event occuring. So far you have been unable to show otherwise. But I am hoping you come up with something at least a little coherent in the near future, preferably before we hit page 20.
Over to you. [Post edited 21 Sep 2017 14:13]
|
If you are trying to teach you are not very good at it!
Wrong wrong and million times wrong.
Your choice of words and previous post in this thread is what's done you.
Oh, and youv still not even proven it' actually happened, even with all your historical primary accounts, first hand witness accounts and your word. I don't believe you as your not believebale. You lost and will keep loosing with every post you make on this thread so, carry on being as boring , I mean relentless as you like
Game is over! | | | |
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 14:16 - Sep 21 with 530 views | Darran |
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 13:58 - Sep 21 by E20Jack |
Yes you are still wrong. I have no option but to regurgitate what I have been trying to teach you for 2 days as you clearly still are confused by these notions. I will happily go 100+ pages rehashing everything I have said, I am truly and utterly relentless.
1) Yes i brought it up as evidence. It is first hand evidence. The strength of which is so important that it is often what determines the outcome of court cases.
2) I never said I was bound to win in court, you made that up. To win in court you would have to have a suspect. If there was ever such a court to ascertain whether an event did or did not take place, then yes I would win hands down, unquestionably.
3) Yes I brought up court. This was to show your lack of understanding between first hand witness accounts and hearsay. A concept you still struggle with even though I have given you the actual definitions.
4) Yes I am saying my statement has been supported by others. They are not ignoring anybody else, I completely believe those who have said they didnt hear or cannot specifically recall. To think everyone would hear such things would be utterly ridiculous in such a large space where people cannot physically hear every call made of hundreds or thousands of simulatanious voices.
5) yes I brought up historical research. This was because you were confused with the court scenario and assumed because there would be no prosecution (as there is no criminal accused) then it means the event did not take place. Needless to say that needs to explaining how ridiculous that view is so suggested we move from an area we are not in (nobody is going to court) and instead focus on what we are doing - historical research.
6) I then taught you that in our scenario, historical research of an event, we have 5 or 6 primary first hand witness accounts of what happened, including one account in which he indeed knows one of the constant abusers - among others that do not recall or did not hear personally. That is pretty damning in favour of the event occuring. So far you have been unable to show otherwise. But I am hoping you come up with something at least a little coherent in the near future, preferably before we hit page 20.
Over to you. [Post edited 21 Sep 2017 14:13]
|
It's good to see you're as ill as you've always been anyway. | |
| |
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 14:19 - Sep 21 with 525 views | E20Jack |
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 14:13 - Sep 21 by costalotta |
If you are trying to teach you are not very good at it!
Wrong wrong and million times wrong.
Your choice of words and previous post in this thread is what's done you.
Oh, and youv still not even proven it' actually happened, even with all your historical primary accounts, first hand witness accounts and your word. I don't believe you as your not believebale. You lost and will keep loosing with every post you make on this thread so, carry on being as boring , I mean relentless as you like
Game is over! |
Well that is something we can agree on, probably why I never went into the teaching profession, clearly my techniques of teaching do not work as you almost seem duller now than when we first started.
You can continue to claim that first hand primary accounts are not evidence (even though by definition they clearly are) and you can get as angry as you like, but it really does not change anything - we have a thread where many people have said they heard racist abuse directed at Price, one of which used to regularly go with one such abuser. With the above known, it is impossible to "loose" (sic).
No amount of attention seeking rubbish can change the above. Still waiting for you to at least try to though.
Over to you. [Post edited 21 Sep 2017 14:21]
| |
| |
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 14:23 - Sep 21 with 519 views | Darran |
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 14:19 - Sep 21 by E20Jack |
Well that is something we can agree on, probably why I never went into the teaching profession, clearly my techniques of teaching do not work as you almost seem duller now than when we first started.
You can continue to claim that first hand primary accounts are not evidence (even though by definition they clearly are) and you can get as angry as you like, but it really does not change anything - we have a thread where many people have said they heard racist abuse directed at Price, one of which used to regularly go with one such abuser. With the above known, it is impossible to "loose" (sic).
No amount of attention seeking rubbish can change the above. Still waiting for you to at least try to though.
Over to you. [Post edited 21 Sep 2017 14:21]
|
You wouldn't have had the time to teach what with modelling and playing in Hanson. | |
| |
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 14:24 - Sep 21 with 513 views | E20Jack |
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 14:23 - Sep 21 by Darran |
You wouldn't have had the time to teach what with modelling and playing in Hanson. |
Your contibution makes as much sense as Costs, related? | |
| |
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 14:25 - Sep 21 with 511 views | costalotta |
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 14:23 - Sep 21 by Darran |
You wouldn't have had the time to teach what with modelling and playing in Hanson. |
Hahahahahahahaha. | | | |
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 14:27 - Sep 21 with 504 views | E20Jack |
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 14:25 - Sep 21 by costalotta |
Hahahahahahahaha. |
And the white flag emerges once more.
And I thank you. | |
| |
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 14:30 - Sep 21 with 499 views | costalotta |
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 14:19 - Sep 21 by E20Jack |
Well that is something we can agree on, probably why I never went into the teaching profession, clearly my techniques of teaching do not work as you almost seem duller now than when we first started.
You can continue to claim that first hand primary accounts are not evidence (even though by definition they clearly are) and you can get as angry as you like, but it really does not change anything - we have a thread where many people have said they heard racist abuse directed at Price, one of which used to regularly go with one such abuser. With the above known, it is impossible to "loose" (sic).
No amount of attention seeking rubbish can change the above. Still waiting for you to at least try to though.
Over to you. [Post edited 21 Sep 2017 14:21]
|
The only attention seeker is you.
Modelling hahahahahahahahahah. That makes a lot of sense.
I've said all I am going to say. You were schooled and lost and are clutching at straws, your wrong and it's seems you're incapable of recognising that or in fact reading your own posts.
Hanson, hahahahahahahhah. Brilliant.
Still waiting for you to prove it? Go on?
I'll tell you what, if yo can prove it I'll give yo the draw.
Go on relentless modelling Hanson one. | | | |
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 14:33 - Sep 21 with 496 views | E20Jack |
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 14:30 - Sep 21 by costalotta |
The only attention seeker is you.
Modelling hahahahahahahahahah. That makes a lot of sense.
I've said all I am going to say. You were schooled and lost and are clutching at straws, your wrong and it's seems you're incapable of recognising that or in fact reading your own posts.
Hanson, hahahahahahahhah. Brilliant.
Still waiting for you to prove it? Go on?
I'll tell you what, if yo can prove it I'll give yo the draw.
Go on relentless modelling Hanson one. |
Your content suggests otherwise. It seems you are desperate for my validation and getting very angry and frustrated at the ease you are being brushed aside, hence your reliance on such things as "lol" in all its forms and hashtagging. Its what a teenager does when he cant think of anyting else, which you may well be to be fair to you.
You have not said all you are going to say, you are lying again. You cannot stand the taste of defeat, especially defeat to a man you hold in such high esteem but disguise it in frustrated angst. You watch how right I am, once you post you are a proven liar.
Lumberjacking hahahahahaha U2 hahahahahahaa. brilliant.
This is a fun game.
Now then prove the witness accounts to be false. If not, the judge rules your motion as rejected. Going to be even more fun you trying to do that after you claimed you have said all you are going to say, wouldn't want to hold you in contempt of court now.
Best of luck. [Post edited 21 Sep 2017 14:39]
| |
| |
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 14:49 - Sep 21 with 479 views | costalotta |
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 14:33 - Sep 21 by E20Jack |
Your content suggests otherwise. It seems you are desperate for my validation and getting very angry and frustrated at the ease you are being brushed aside, hence your reliance on such things as "lol" in all its forms and hashtagging. Its what a teenager does when he cant think of anyting else, which you may well be to be fair to you.
You have not said all you are going to say, you are lying again. You cannot stand the taste of defeat, especially defeat to a man you hold in such high esteem but disguise it in frustrated angst. You watch how right I am, once you post you are a proven liar.
Lumberjacking hahahahahaha U2 hahahahahahaa. brilliant.
This is a fun game.
Now then prove the witness accounts to be false. If not, the judge rules your motion as rejected. Going to be even more fun you trying to do that after you claimed you have said all you are going to say, wouldn't want to hold you in contempt of court now.
Best of luck. [Post edited 21 Sep 2017 14:39]
|
Touched a nerve there Darr. Hahahahahaha aahhhhhhhhahahahahahahahahhahaha.
I'm old enough to have seen much more than you little one. I am young enough to know there is still so much in life to learn, enjoy and look forward too.
However, My age is not in question only your evidence to prove something happened and you still cannot.
And I see your wrong obsession is back with a bang, but that's understandable as your clearly now extremely angry, probably at the hansonmodelling man you are. So funny! And frustrated as you cannot get any of your incoherent and weak points across. #rattled.
Game was over a good few posts ago, but your relentless so you will keep us entertainied.
Too easy. | | | |
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 14:52 - Sep 21 with 472 views | Darran |
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 14:30 - Sep 21 by costalotta |
The only attention seeker is you.
Modelling hahahahahahahahahah. That makes a lot of sense.
I've said all I am going to say. You were schooled and lost and are clutching at straws, your wrong and it's seems you're incapable of recognising that or in fact reading your own posts.
Hanson, hahahahahahahhah. Brilliant.
Still waiting for you to prove it? Go on?
I'll tell you what, if yo can prove it I'll give yo the draw.
Go on relentless modelling Hanson one. |
MMMbop. | |
| |
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 14:54 - Sep 21 with 468 views | E20Jack |
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 14:49 - Sep 21 by costalotta |
Touched a nerve there Darr. Hahahahahaha aahhhhhhhhahahahahahahahahhahaha.
I'm old enough to have seen much more than you little one. I am young enough to know there is still so much in life to learn, enjoy and look forward too.
However, My age is not in question only your evidence to prove something happened and you still cannot.
And I see your wrong obsession is back with a bang, but that's understandable as your clearly now extremely angry, probably at the hansonmodelling man you are. So funny! And frustrated as you cannot get any of your incoherent and weak points across. #rattled.
Game was over a good few posts ago, but your relentless so you will keep us entertainied.
Too easy. |
Really? Jesus your level of perception really is unhinged.
And in one fell swoop you prove yourself to be a liar, it only took 20 mins or so for you to cave!
You are right on the fact you have much to learn. That is a very important thing to recognise. I hope it is not a soundbite and you do indeed recognise this as your weakness, because its stark.
Yes you do see I am wrong, but you also see first hand primary sources as hearsay too, so that doesnt really mean much does it?
You can get as frustrated and as angry as you like, you can hashtag and look for help from other posters to your hearts content... But unless you can prove why the first hand accounts are not true. Then you are by definition, wrong and are just drowning in your own waffle.
Please continue, im in til 11.30 tonight, this is so much more fun. Be my play thing, dont let me down now. [Post edited 21 Sep 2017 14:57]
| |
| |
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 14:55 - Sep 21 with 464 views | E20Jack |
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 14:52 - Sep 21 by Darran |
MMMbop. |
Blammmm scoop. | |
| |
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 14:56 - Sep 21 with 463 views | Darran |
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 14:54 - Sep 21 by E20Jack |
Really? Jesus your level of perception really is unhinged.
And in one fell swoop you prove yourself to be a liar, it only took 20 mins or so for you to cave!
You are right on the fact you have much to learn. That is a very important thing to recognise. I hope it is not a soundbite and you do indeed recognise this as your weakness, because its stark.
Yes you do see I am wrong, but you also see first hand primary sources as hearsay too, so that doesnt really mean much does it?
You can get as frustrated and as angry as you like, you can hashtag and look for help from other posters to your hearts content... But unless you can prove why the first hand accounts are not true. Then you are by definition, wrong and are just drowning in your own waffle.
Please continue, im in til 11.30 tonight, this is so much more fun. Be my play thing, dont let me down now. [Post edited 21 Sep 2017 14:57]
|
You'll be in this thread untill 11:30 sometime in 2025 it need be. | |
| |
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 14:57 - Sep 21 with 459 views | E20Jack |
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 14:56 - Sep 21 by Darran |
You'll be in this thread untill 11:30 sometime in 2025 it need be. |
And the rest. | |
| |
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 15:07 - Sep 21 with 441 views | costalotta |
| Serious question for people that went to the Vetch on 14:54 - Sep 21 by E20Jack |
Really? Jesus your level of perception really is unhinged.
And in one fell swoop you prove yourself to be a liar, it only took 20 mins or so for you to cave!
You are right on the fact you have much to learn. That is a very important thing to recognise. I hope it is not a soundbite and you do indeed recognise this as your weakness, because its stark.
Yes you do see I am wrong, but you also see first hand primary sources as hearsay too, so that doesnt really mean much does it?
You can get as frustrated and as angry as you like, you can hashtag and look for help from other posters to your hearts content... But unless you can prove why the first hand accounts are not true. Then you are by definition, wrong and are just drowning in your own waffle.
Please continue, im in til 11.30 tonight, this is so much more fun. Be my play thing, dont let me down now. [Post edited 21 Sep 2017 14:57]
|
Liar? Really. Mmmmm I wonder what I could have lied about that it took you 20 mins to note. Perhaps you could point it out and provide the evidenced? It will be good practise for you.
Yes, there is always much to learn. It's in my nature and I enjoy learning new things. Don't you?
Still wrong on the anger frustration stuff. Keep at it if you like. At least I'm not mr ehansonmalemodelriskman extraordinaire.
Oh, you still lost as you've still not proved it happened. Why not try, be relentless about that instead being relentlessly boring.
I didn't ask Darren to post anything, and if I did he'd tell me to f ck off. You must agree it was a corker? Even if you were the recipient. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
