Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tory MP Scott Benton filmed offering to lobby for gambling industry investors. Scott Benton was prepared to leak market sensitive information to an investment fund and ask parliamentary questions on its behalf, in breach of parliamentary lobbying rules, an undercover investigation for The Times found." https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/tory-mp-scott-benton-rishi-sunak-parliament-the-times-commons-b1072607.html Obviously this is just "but, but TORY" and not as serious as the investigation which Jess Phillips is facing for something she may or may not have done. There is already a thread about that. Just a distraction and a deflection..." You do a lot of trying to antagonise me round here don't you. I'd appreciate if you could keep your personal digs at me out of threads I haven't participated in. Thanks  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tory MP Scott Benton filmed offering to lobby for gambling industry investors. Scott Benton was prepared to leak market sensitive information to an investment fund and ask parliamentary questions on its behalf, in breach of parliamentary lobbying rules, an undercover investigation for The Times found." https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/tory-mp-scott-benton-rishi-sunak-parliament-the-times-commons-b1072607.html Obviously this is just "but, but TORY" and not as serious as the investigation which Jess Phillips is facing for something she may or may not have done. There is already a thread about that. Just a distraction and a deflection..." Those bloody communists at the times!!!! Lol | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tory MP Scott Benton filmed offering to lobby for gambling industry investors. Scott Benton was prepared to leak market sensitive information to an investment fund and ask parliamentary questions on its behalf, in breach of parliamentary lobbying rules, an undercover investigation for The Times found." https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/tory-mp-scott-benton-rishi-sunak-parliament-the-times-commons-b1072607.html Obviously this is just "but, but TORY" and not as serious as the investigation which Jess Phillips is facing for something she may or may not have done. There is already a thread about that. Just a distraction and a deflection..." I think you are going to be hard pushed to find anyone defending Benton and I'm sure he will be removed from the party after the investigation into his alleged breach of the ministerial code of conduct. Thanks for clarity on the thread not being about Jess Phillips too, good shout and should keep the thread from being derailed | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tory MP Scott Benton filmed offering to lobby for gambling industry investors. Scott Benton was prepared to leak market sensitive information to an investment fund and ask parliamentary questions on its behalf, in breach of parliamentary lobbying rules, an undercover investigation for The Times found." https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/tory-mp-scott-benton-rishi-sunak-parliament-the-times-commons-b1072607.html Obviously this is just "but, but TORY" and not as serious as the investigation which Jess Phillips is facing for something she may or may not have done. There is already a thread about that. Just a distraction and a deflection... You do a lot of trying to antagonise me round here don't you. I'd appreciate if you could keep your personal digs at me out of threads I haven't participated in. Thanks "Yep, all about you  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tory MP Scott Benton filmed offering to lobby for gambling industry investors. Scott Benton was prepared to leak market sensitive information to an investment fund and ask parliamentary questions on its behalf, in breach of parliamentary lobbying rules, an undercover investigation for The Times found." https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/tory-mp-scott-benton-rishi-sunak-parliament-the-times-commons-b1072607.html Obviously this is just "but, but TORY" and not as serious as the investigation which Jess Phillips is facing for something she may or may not have done. There is already a thread about that. Just a distraction and a deflection... You do a lot of trying to antagonise me round here don't you. I'd appreciate if you could keep your personal digs at me out of threads I haven't participated in. Thanks
Yep, all about you "I'm not sure why you try to get personal with me all the time, it's strange tbh. Anyway, on the topic, if the video shows him breaking the rules then he should be thrown from the party for life due to the severity. I know how you like to know the 'severity of indiscretions', this is pretty severe. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tory MP Scott Benton filmed offering to lobby for gambling industry investors. Scott Benton was prepared to leak market sensitive information to an investment fund and ask parliamentary questions on its behalf, in breach of parliamentary lobbying rules, an undercover investigation for The Times found." https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/tory-mp-scott-benton-rishi-sunak-parliament-the-times-commons-b1072607.html Obviously this is just "but, but TORY" and not as serious as the investigation which Jess Phillips is facing for something she may or may not have done. There is already a thread about that. Just a distraction and a deflection... You do a lot of trying to antagonise me round here don't you. I'd appreciate if you could keep your personal digs at me out of threads I haven't participated in. Thanks
Yep, all about you
I'm not sure why you try to get personal with me all the time, it's strange tbh.
Anyway, on the topic, if the video shows him breaking the rules then he should be thrown from the party for life due to the severity. I know how you like to know the 'severity of indiscretions', this is pretty severe."Making that comment really does demonstrate how un-self-aware you are. You provoke a response no less than I do, but seem unable to acknowledge it. Well done partially acknowledging the thread though
He should be disbarred from political office, after the investigation has confirmed the rules being broken.
I would add that this is one of the most severe abuses of power. Others are far less serious. Some people seem unable to say the same for some reason. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tory MP Scott Benton filmed offering to lobby for gambling industry investors. Scott Benton was prepared to leak market sensitive information to an investment fund and ask parliamentary questions on its behalf, in breach of parliamentary lobbying rules, an undercover investigation for The Times found." https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/tory-mp-scott-benton-rishi-sunak-parliament-the-times-commons-b1072607.html Obviously this is just "but, but TORY" and not as serious as the investigation which Jess Phillips is facing for something she may or may not have done. There is already a thread about that. Just a distraction and a deflection... You do a lot of trying to antagonise me round here don't you. I'd appreciate if you could keep your personal digs at me out of threads I haven't participated in. Thanks
Yep, all about you
I'm not sure why you try to get personal with me all the time, it's strange tbh.
Anyway, on the topic, if the video shows him breaking the rules then he should be thrown from the party for life due to the severity. I know how you like to know the 'severity of indiscretions', this is pretty severe.
Making that comment really does demonstrate how un-self-aware you are.
You provoke a response no less than I do, but seem unable to acknowledge it.
Well done partially acknowledging the thread though
He should be disbarred from political office, after the investigation has confirmed the rules being broken.
I would add that this is one of the most severe abuses of power. Others are far less serious. Some people seem unable to say the same for some reason."Didn't you just repeat what I said? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tory MP Scott Benton filmed offering to lobby for gambling industry investors. Scott Benton was prepared to leak market sensitive information to an investment fund and ask parliamentary questions on its behalf, in breach of parliamentary lobbying rules, an undercover investigation for The Times found." https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/tory-mp-scott-benton-rishi-sunak-parliament-the-times-commons-b1072607.html Obviously this is just "but, but TORY" and not as serious as the investigation which Jess Phillips is facing for something she may or may not have done. There is already a thread about that. Just a distraction and a deflection... You do a lot of trying to antagonise me round here don't you. I'd appreciate if you could keep your personal digs at me out of threads I haven't participated in. Thanks
Yep, all about you
I'm not sure why you try to get personal with me all the time, it's strange tbh.
Anyway, on the topic, if the video shows him breaking the rules then he should be thrown from the party for life due to the severity. I know how you like to know the 'severity of indiscretions', this is pretty severe.
Making that comment really does demonstrate how un-self-aware you are.
You provoke a response no less than I do, but seem unable to acknowledge it.
Well done partially acknowledging the thread though
He should be disbarred from political office, after the investigation has confirmed the rules being broken.
I would add that this is one of the most severe abuses of power. Others are far less serious. Some people seem unable to say the same for some reason.
Didn't you just repeat what I said?
"Nope. You were unable to accept that the severity of a matter is pertinent to the discussion of the matter in all cases, not just this one. It all just about proving each other wrong. I know that is what I can be drawn into doing. You cannot seem to accept that's what you are also doing. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tory MP Scott Benton filmed offering to lobby for gambling industry investors. Scott Benton was prepared to leak market sensitive information to an investment fund and ask parliamentary questions on its behalf, in breach of parliamentary lobbying rules, an undercover investigation for The Times found." https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/tory-mp-scott-benton-rishi-sunak-parliament-the-times-commons-b1072607.html Obviously this is just "but, but TORY" and not as serious as the investigation which Jess Phillips is facing for something she may or may not have done. There is already a thread about that. Just a distraction and a deflection... You do a lot of trying to antagonise me round here don't you. I'd appreciate if you could keep your personal digs at me out of threads I haven't participated in. Thanks
Yep, all about you
I'm not sure why you try to get personal with me all the time, it's strange tbh.
Anyway, on the topic, if the video shows him breaking the rules then he should be thrown from the party for life due to the severity. I know how you like to know the 'severity of indiscretions', this is pretty severe.
Making that comment really does demonstrate how un-self-aware you are.
You provoke a response no less than I do, but seem unable to acknowledge it.
Well done partially acknowledging the thread though
He should be disbarred from political office, after the investigation has confirmed the rules being broken.
I would add that this is one of the most severe abuses of power. Others are far less serious. Some people seem unable to say the same for some reason.
Didn't you just repeat what I said?
Nope. You were unable to accept that the severity of a matter is pertinent to the discussion of the matter in all cases, not just this one.
It all just about proving each other wrong. I know that is what I can be drawn into doing. You cannot seem to accept that's what you are also doing."I'm not sure why you're talking about other threads, you started this thread talking about others and you're still at it. I'm pretty sure I said he should be thrown from the party for life, and that this is pretty severe. You then repeated that. Give it a rest mate, you'll give yourself a hernia. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tory MP Scott Benton filmed offering to lobby for gambling industry investors. Scott Benton was prepared to leak market sensitive information to an investment fund and ask parliamentary questions on its behalf, in breach of parliamentary lobbying rules, an undercover investigation for The Times found." https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/tory-mp-scott-benton-rishi-sunak-parliament-the-times-commons-b1072607.html Obviously this is just "but, but TORY" and not as serious as the investigation which Jess Phillips is facing for something she may or may not have done. There is already a thread about that. Just a distraction and a deflection... You do a lot of trying to antagonise me round here don't you. I'd appreciate if you could keep your personal digs at me out of threads I haven't participated in. Thanks
Yep, all about you
I'm not sure why you try to get personal with me all the time, it's strange tbh.
Anyway, on the topic, if the video shows him breaking the rules then he should be thrown from the party for life due to the severity. I know how you like to know the 'severity of indiscretions', this is pretty severe.
Making that comment really does demonstrate how un-self-aware you are.
You provoke a response no less than I do, but seem unable to acknowledge it.
Well done partially acknowledging the thread though
He should be disbarred from political office, after the investigation has confirmed the rules being broken.
I would add that this is one of the most severe abuses of power. Others are far less serious. Some people seem unable to say the same for some reason.
Didn't you just repeat what I said?
Nope. You were unable to accept that the severity of a matter is pertinent to the discussion of the matter in all cases, not just this one.
It all just about proving each other wrong. I know that is what I can be drawn into doing. You cannot seem to accept that's what you are also doing."For the record, I'm not trying to prove you wrong, we agree on the punishment for this. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tory MP Scott Benton filmed offering to lobby for gambling industry investors. Scott Benton was prepared to leak market sensitive information to an investment fund and ask parliamentary questions on its behalf, in breach of parliamentary lobbying rules, an undercover investigation for The Times found." https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/tory-mp-scott-benton-rishi-sunak-parliament-the-times-commons-b1072607.html Obviously this is just "but, but TORY" and not as serious as the investigation which Jess Phillips is facing for something she may or may not have done. There is already a thread about that. Just a distraction and a deflection... You do a lot of trying to antagonise me round here don't you. I'd appreciate if you could keep your personal digs at me out of threads I haven't participated in. Thanks
Yep, all about you
I'm not sure why you try to get personal with me all the time, it's strange tbh.
Anyway, on the topic, if the video shows him breaking the rules then he should be thrown from the party for life due to the severity. I know how you like to know the 'severity of indiscretions', this is pretty severe.
Making that comment really does demonstrate how un-self-aware you are.
You provoke a response no less than I do, but seem unable to acknowledge it.
Well done partially acknowledging the thread though
He should be disbarred from political office, after the investigation has confirmed the rules being broken.
I would add that this is one of the most severe abuses of power. Others are far less serious. Some people seem unable to say the same for some reason.
Didn't you just repeat what I said?
Nope. You were unable to accept that the severity of a matter is pertinent to the discussion of the matter in all cases, not just this one.
It all just about proving each other wrong. I know that is what I can be drawn into doing. You cannot seem to accept that's what you are also doing.
I'm not sure why you're talking about other threads, you started this thread talking about others and you're still at it.
I'm pretty sure I said he should be thrown from the party for life, and that this is pretty severe.
You then repeated that. Give it a rest mate, you'll give yourself a hernia."I can discuss whatever I like on this thread, particularly as it is about a related topic. As can you. Why the need to control once again? It is quite acceptable to point out the faults of others but it comes across better if you accept your own behaviour for what it is. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tory MP Scott Benton filmed offering to lobby for gambling industry investors. Scott Benton was prepared to leak market sensitive information to an investment fund and ask parliamentary questions on its behalf, in breach of parliamentary lobbying rules, an undercover investigation for The Times found." https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/tory-mp-scott-benton-rishi-sunak-parliament-the-times-commons-b1072607.html Obviously this is just "but, but TORY" and not as serious as the investigation which Jess Phillips is facing for something she may or may not have done. There is already a thread about that. Just a distraction and a deflection... You do a lot of trying to antagonise me round here don't you. I'd appreciate if you could keep your personal digs at me out of threads I haven't participated in. Thanks
Yep, all about you
I'm not sure why you try to get personal with me all the time, it's strange tbh.
Anyway, on the topic, if the video shows him breaking the rules then he should be thrown from the party for life due to the severity. I know how you like to know the 'severity of indiscretions', this is pretty severe.
Making that comment really does demonstrate how un-self-aware you are.
You provoke a response no less than I do, but seem unable to acknowledge it.
Well done partially acknowledging the thread though
He should be disbarred from political office, after the investigation has confirmed the rules being broken.
I would add that this is one of the most severe abuses of power. Others are far less serious. Some people seem unable to say the same for some reason.
Didn't you just repeat what I said?
Nope. You were unable to accept that the severity of a matter is pertinent to the discussion of the matter in all cases, not just this one.
It all just about proving each other wrong. I know that is what I can be drawn into doing. You cannot seem to accept that's what you are also doing.
For the record, I'm not trying to prove you wrong, we agree on the punishment for this."...and there are many less severe breaches that should not be viewed as harshly | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tory MP Scott Benton filmed offering to lobby for gambling industry investors. Scott Benton was prepared to leak market sensitive information to an investment fund and ask parliamentary questions on its behalf, in breach of parliamentary lobbying rules, an undercover investigation for The Times found." https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/tory-mp-scott-benton-rishi-sunak-parliament-the-times-commons-b1072607.html Obviously this is just "but, but TORY" and not as serious as the investigation which Jess Phillips is facing for something she may or may not have done. There is already a thread about that. Just a distraction and a deflection... You do a lot of trying to antagonise me round here don't you. I'd appreciate if you could keep your personal digs at me out of threads I haven't participated in. Thanks
Yep, all about you
I'm not sure why you try to get personal with me all the time, it's strange tbh.
Anyway, on the topic, if the video shows him breaking the rules then he should be thrown from the party for life due to the severity. I know how you like to know the 'severity of indiscretions', this is pretty severe.
Making that comment really does demonstrate how un-self-aware you are.
You provoke a response no less than I do, but seem unable to acknowledge it.
Well done partially acknowledging the thread though
He should be disbarred from political office, after the investigation has confirmed the rules being broken.
I would add that this is one of the most severe abuses of power. Others are far less serious. Some people seem unable to say the same for some reason.
Didn't you just repeat what I said?
Nope. You were unable to accept that the severity of a matter is pertinent to the discussion of the matter in all cases, not just this one.
It all just about proving each other wrong. I know that is what I can be drawn into doing. You cannot seem to accept that's what you are also doing.
I'm not sure why you're talking about other threads, you started this thread talking about others and you're still at it.
I'm pretty sure I said he should be thrown from the party for life, and that this is pretty severe.
You then repeated that. Give it a rest mate, you'll give yourself a hernia.
I can discuss whatever I like on this thread, particularly as it is about a related topic. As can you.
Why the need to control once again?
It is quite acceptable to point out the faults of others but it comes across better if you accept your own behaviour for what it is."I've told you on numerous occasions you're free to say what you like. I just prefer when threads are on topic. You crack on mate. I'll be ignoring any personal issues here. And there's nothing to discussbon topic seeing as we agree, so on that note. Good day  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tory MP Scott Benton filmed offering to lobby for gambling industry investors. Scott Benton was prepared to leak market sensitive information to an investment fund and ask parliamentary questions on its behalf, in breach of parliamentary lobbying rules, an undercover investigation for The Times found." https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/tory-mp-scott-benton-rishi-sunak-parliament-the-times-commons-b1072607.html Obviously this is just "but, but TORY" and not as serious as the investigation which Jess Phillips is facing for something she may or may not have done. There is already a thread about that. Just a distraction and a deflection... You do a lot of trying to antagonise me round here don't you. I'd appreciate if you could keep your personal digs at me out of threads I haven't participated in. Thanks
Yep, all about you
I'm not sure why you try to get personal with me all the time, it's strange tbh.
Anyway, on the topic, if the video shows him breaking the rules then he should be thrown from the party for life due to the severity. I know how you like to know the 'severity of indiscretions', this is pretty severe.
Making that comment really does demonstrate how un-self-aware you are.
You provoke a response no less than I do, but seem unable to acknowledge it.
Well done partially acknowledging the thread though
He should be disbarred from political office, after the investigation has confirmed the rules being broken.
I would add that this is one of the most severe abuses of power. Others are far less serious. Some people seem unable to say the same for some reason.
Didn't you just repeat what I said?
Nope. You were unable to accept that the severity of a matter is pertinent to the discussion of the matter in all cases, not just this one.
It all just about proving each other wrong. I know that is what I can be drawn into doing. You cannot seem to accept that's what you are also doing.
I'm not sure why you're talking about other threads, you started this thread talking about others and you're still at it.
I'm pretty sure I said he should be thrown from the party for life, and that this is pretty severe.
You then repeated that. Give it a rest mate, you'll give yourself a hernia.
I can discuss whatever I like on this thread, particularly as it is about a related topic. As can you.
Why the need to control once again?
It is quite acceptable to point out the faults of others but it comes across better if you accept your own behaviour for what it is.
I've told you on numerous occasions you're free to say what you like. I just prefer when threads are on topic.
You crack on mate. I'll be ignoring any personal issues here. And there's nothing to discussbon topic seeing as we agree, so on that note. Good day "Am I bovered though? 
The moral high ground taken by you now? Well done. Bravo
That's me being overly petulant and unconstructively provocative and able to acknowledge it | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Am I bovered though?
The moral high ground taken by you now? Well done. Bravo
That's me being overly petulant and unconstructively provocative and able to acknowledge it"It's nice to see that you're learning who you are. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Am I bovered though?
The moral high ground taken by you now? Well done. Bravo
That's me being overly petulant and unconstructively provocative and able to acknowledge it
It's nice to see that you're learning who you are."Was that your attempt at a mic drop? The irony of making nothing but a directly personal comment lost on you? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Am I bovered though? The moral high ground taken by you now? Well done. Bravo That's me being overly petulant and unconstructively provocative and able to acknowledge it" "It's nice to see that you're learning who you are." "Was that your attempt at a mic drop? The irony of making nothing but a directly personal comment lost on you?" That was a genuine expression of happiness at seeing what I thought was someone acknowledging their faults. If I understand you correctly, and it was just sarcasm, then I'm disappointed. I know we haven't got on in this forum, but I bear you no ill will. I just wish that you'd realise that your behaviour is not helping you to win friends and influence people. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Am I bovered though? The moral high ground taken by you now? Well done. Bravo That's me being overly petulant and unconstructively provocative and able to acknowledge it It's nice to see that you're learning who you are. Was that your attempt at a mic drop? The irony of making nothing but a directly personal comment lost on you? That was a genuine expression of happiness at seeing what I thought was someone acknowledging their faults. If I understand you correctly, and it was just sarcasm, then I'm disappointed. I know we haven't got on in this forum, but I bear you no ill will. I just wish that you'd realise that your behaviour is not helping you to win friends and influence people." That certainly came across as a smug comment to me. I am perfectly aware of when I react to someone's insults. I've never denied it. Can you acknowledge that you spend inordinate time nit-picking about pedantic points, if this is all about self-awareness? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Can you acknowledge that you spend inordinate time nit-picking about pedantic points, if this is all about self-awareness?" I like to get the details right, and I often post to point out small points that people may not be aware of. Some might call this pedantry, but I like to think that I add some clarity to some debates. I don't think I spend an inordinate amount of time doing this. There are only 2 people that have come out and called me a pedant, and those people generally say it when they are losing their argument. I welcome constructive criticism from anyone here. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Can you acknowledge that you spend inordinate time nit-picking about pedantic points, if this is all about self-awareness? I like to get the details right, and I often post to point out small points that people may not be aware of. Some might call this pedantry, but I like to think that I add some clarity to some debates. I don't think I spend an inordinate amount of time doing this. There are only 2 people that have come out and called me a pedant, and those people generally say it when they are losing their argument. I welcome constructive criticism from anyone here." So no, you can't. Not even something for you to consider either. In your opinion, always right and always on topic. Interesting view of yourself. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Can you acknowledge that you spend inordinate time nit-picking about pedantic points, if this is all about self-awareness? I like to get the details right, and I often post to point out small points that people may not be aware of. Some might call this pedantry, but I like to think that I add some clarity to some debates. I don't think I spend an inordinate amount of time doing this. There are only 2 people that have come out and called me a pedant, and those people generally say it when they are losing their argument. I welcome constructive criticism from anyone here." I've seen people call out your 'pedantry'. For me the people who say 'pedantic' or 'semantic', is their way of trying to shut down the conversation or discredit the opponents view because they don't actually want to discuss actual detail. Headlines are much better for throwing shade. Thats my opinion on those words anyway. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Can you acknowledge that you spend inordinate time nit-picking about pedantic points, if this is all about self-awareness? I like to get the details right, and I often post to point out small points that people may not be aware of. Some might call this pedantry, but I like to think that I add some clarity to some debates. I don't think I spend an inordinate amount of time doing this. There are only 2 people that have come out and called me a pedant, and those people generally say it when they are losing their argument. I welcome constructive criticism from anyone here. I've seen people call out your 'pedantry'. For me the people who say 'pedantic' or 'semantic', is their way of trying to shut down the conversation or discredit the opponents view because they don't actually want to discuss actual detail. Headlines are much better for throwing shade. Thats my opinion on those words anyway. " You also unable to acknowledge any part in making personal attacks in an argument, but trying to find yet another way to criticise. Effectively any method of arguing against you is wrong. Good effort | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Can you acknowledge that you spend inordinate time nit-picking about pedantic points, if this is all about self-awareness? I like to get the details right, and I often post to point out small points that people may not be aware of. Some might call this pedantry, but I like to think that I add some clarity to some debates. I don't think I spend an inordinate amount of time doing this. There are only 2 people that have come out and called me a pedant, and those people generally say it when they are losing their argument. I welcome constructive criticism from anyone here. I've seen people call out your 'pedantry'. For me the people who say 'pedantic' or 'semantic', is their way of trying to shut down the conversation or discredit the opponents view because they don't actually want to discuss actual detail. Headlines are much better for throwing shade. Thats my opinion on those words anyway. You also unable to acknowledge any part in making personal attacks in an argument, but trying to find yet another way to criticise. Effectively any method of arguing against you is wrong. Good effort "I was responding to someone else, not you. You really need to let it go mate | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Can you acknowledge that you spend inordinate time nit-picking about pedantic points, if this is all about self-awareness? I like to get the details right, and I often post to point out small points that people may not be aware of. Some might call this pedantry, but I like to think that I add some clarity to some debates. I don't think I spend an inordinate amount of time doing this. There are only 2 people that have come out and called me a pedant, and those people generally say it when they are losing their argument. I welcome constructive criticism from anyone here. I've seen people call out your 'pedantry'. For me the people who say 'pedantic' or 'semantic', is their way of trying to shut down the conversation or discredit the opponents view because they don't actually want to discuss actual detail. Headlines are much better for throwing shade. Thats my opinion on those words anyway. You also unable to acknowledge any part in making personal attacks in an argument, but trying to find yet another way to criticise. Effectively any method of arguing against you is wrong. Good effort
I was responding to someone else, not you.
You really need to let it go mate "I really don't need to allow you to dictate who posts what as you always try to. Unable to see your own behaviour being no different to those you criticise. Your first post displays all that is necessary to indicate how closely your ego is tied to what you post. Chin up. You might learn something about yourself eventually... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Can you acknowledge that you spend inordinate time nit-picking about pedantic points, if this is all about self-awareness? I like to get the details right, and I often post to point out small points that people may not be aware of. Some might call this pedantry, but I like to think that I add some clarity to some debates. I don't think I spend an inordinate amount of time doing this. There are only 2 people that have come out and called me a pedant, and those people generally say it when they are losing their argument. I welcome constructive criticism from anyone here. I've seen people call out your 'pedantry'. For me the people who say 'pedantic' or 'semantic', is their way of trying to shut down the conversation or discredit the opponents view because they don't actually want to discuss actual detail. Headlines are much better for throwing shade. Thats my opinion on those words anyway. You also unable to acknowledge any part in making personal attacks in an argument, but trying to find yet another way to criticise. Effectively any method of arguing against you is wrong. Good effort
I was responding to someone else, not you.
You really need to let it go mate
I really don't need to allow you to dictate who posts what as you always try to. Unable to see your own behaviour being no different to those you criticise.
Your first post displays all that is necessary to indicate how closely your ego is tied to what you post.
Chin up. You might learn something about yourself eventually..."I just spoke to Elsa, guess what she said | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Can you acknowledge that you spend inordinate time nit-picking about pedantic points, if this is all about self-awareness? I like to get the details right, and I often post to point out small points that people may not be aware of. Some might call this pedantry, but I like to think that I add some clarity to some debates. I don't think I spend an inordinate amount of time doing this. There are only 2 people that have come out and called me a pedant, and those people generally say it when they are losing their argument. I welcome constructive criticism from anyone here. I've seen people call out your 'pedantry'. For me the people who say 'pedantic' or 'semantic', is their way of trying to shut down the conversation or discredit the opponents view because they don't actually want to discuss actual detail. Headlines are much better for throwing shade. Thats my opinion on those words anyway. You also unable to acknowledge any part in making personal attacks in an argument, but trying to find yet another way to criticise. Effectively any method of arguing against you is wrong. Good effort
I was responding to someone else, not you.
You really need to let it go mate
I really don't need to allow you to dictate who posts what as you always try to. Unable to see your own behaviour being no different to those you criticise.
Your first post displays all that is necessary to indicate how closely your ego is tied to what you post.
Chin up. You might learn something about yourself eventually..."Why must you ruin every debate you contribute to, usually ending with derogatory personal comments toward others...? It's a real pattern. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Can you acknowledge that you spend inordinate time nit-picking about pedantic points, if this is all about self-awareness? I like to get the details right, and I often post to point out small points that people may not be aware of. Some might call this pedantry, but I like to think that I add some clarity to some debates. I don't think I spend an inordinate amount of time doing this. There are only 2 people that have come out and called me a pedant, and those people generally say it when they are losing their argument. I welcome constructive criticism from anyone here. I've seen people call out your 'pedantry'. For me the people who say 'pedantic' or 'semantic', is their way of trying to shut down the conversation or discredit the opponents view because they don't actually want to discuss actual detail. Headlines are much better for throwing shade. Thats my opinion on those words anyway. You also unable to acknowledge any part in making personal attacks in an argument, but trying to find yet another way to criticise. Effectively any method of arguing against you is wrong. Good effort
I was responding to someone else, not you.
You really need to let it go mate
I really don't need to allow you to dictate who posts what as you always try to. Unable to see your own behaviour being no different to those you criticise.
Your first post displays all that is necessary to indicate how closely your ego is tied to what you post.
Chin up. You might learn something about yourself eventually...
I just spoke to Elsa, guess what she said "Great "evidence" | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Can you acknowledge that you spend inordinate time nit-picking about pedantic points, if this is all about self-awareness? I like to get the details right, and I often post to point out small points that people may not be aware of. Some might call this pedantry, but I like to think that I add some clarity to some debates. I don't think I spend an inordinate amount of time doing this. There are only 2 people that have come out and called me a pedant, and those people generally say it when they are losing their argument. I welcome constructive criticism from anyone here. I've seen people call out your 'pedantry'. For me the people who say 'pedantic' or 'semantic', is their way of trying to shut down the conversation or discredit the opponents view because they don't actually want to discuss actual detail. Headlines are much better for throwing shade. Thats my opinion on those words anyway. You also unable to acknowledge any part in making personal attacks in an argument, but trying to find yet another way to criticise. Effectively any method of arguing against you is wrong. Good effort
I was responding to someone else, not you.
You really need to let it go mate
I really don't need to allow you to dictate who posts what as you always try to. Unable to see your own behaviour being no different to those you criticise.
Your first post displays all that is necessary to indicate how closely your ego is tied to what you post.
Chin up. You might learn something about yourself eventually...
Why must you ruin every debate you contribute to, usually ending with derogatory personal comments toward others...?
It's a real pattern."Thank you for your "helpful" contribution. Also a "real pattern". | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I've seen people call out your 'pedantry'. For me the people who say 'pedantic' or 'semantic', is their way of trying to shut down the conversation or discredit the opponents view because they don't actually want to discuss actual detail. Headlines are much better for throwing shade. Thats my opinion on those words anyway. " That's very kind of you to say so. Thank you. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
