SFD V Ricker dump thread

LOL.  You gottta be kidding...  That isn't proof.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

There's no record anywhere of anything being sold so I can't post that.

Rickler wrote:

They can revalue it all they like, they won't make any money until they sell.

Now man up.

Labour party win...

Undemocratic - Yes or No?

I've answered that already.

And despite it being copper-bottomed proof - nothing could be proofier, really, could it? I knew it wouldn't be good enough, though. Nothing ever is.

If anybody ever wants proof of how boneheadedly irrational this whole senseless vendetta is, and has been for donkey's years, then there you have it in spades.

Proofier?
LOl. Have they soldier?

Undemocratic, yes or no?  Why can't you answer?  Mental problem?

I've answered that already.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

I've answered that already.

For God sake just say yes or no and put an end to it.  I am fed up with pages of bull over the two of you and your petty squabble.

He started it.

pepsipete wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

I've answered that already.

For God sake just say yes or no and put an end to it.  I am fed up with pages of bull over the two of you and your petty squabble.

It isn't me that is squabbling. I NEVER start these things.

PatDunne wrote:

He started it.

Quite.

Dont care who started it, put an end to it.

pepsipete wrote:

Dont care who started it, put an end to it.

And how do I do that?

Rickler is well into his second DECADE of this. He has no intention of ever stopping and if it wasn't this it would be something else.

There's sod all I can do about it.

Oh yes there is.

Simple...

Yes or no?

Guys, the mods would normally let this squabbling go, but since Pepsi's complained on the thread could I ask you both to ease off - we wouldn't to spoil the site for other people would we?

Rickler wrote:

Oh yes there is.

Simple...

Yes or no?

I've answered that already.

pepsipete wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

I've answered that already.

For God sake just say yes or no and put an end to it.  I am fed up with pages of bull over the two of you and your petty squabble.

...and I'm fed up clicking on 'Half time', only to find out there are no new posts worth reading, only another mind numbing entry in that game of yours that even a simpleton would find boring.

So there.

Good move except it's much more Rickler v SFD.

I've never started any of it.

To put an end to this here is my oft referenced reply, but slightly emboldened for emphasis, to the question in hand (again) along with Greenskin's (who raised the matter originally) response to it.

Greenskin wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

He's not asked me anything that I could answer. To be honest once he accused me of advocating votes for 8 year olds (which is pure invention on his part) I didn't think he was seriously engaging with the debate.

I have pointed out that I was still in Primary school in 1974. What would you expect me to have said at the time?

More to the point it'd be damned weird if I remembered what I'd said about it had it even crossed my radar.

What I have said since on this thread is that any result that goes to a party polling fewer votes is clearly, obviously, definably, undeniably undemocratic. Especially when it goes wrong as often as the US electoral college does.

And in the past I have often made the case for PR and I was in favour of the AV option in the first of Cameron's referenda which was as close to being able to vote for it as I have been able to (there was a thread on here if you want to find it which will back me up on this).

I have also on occasion drawn attention to Churchill's defeat of Attlee in 1951 as a grossly unfair outcome and have never advocated on behalf of FPTP.

There is no inconsistency in my views or statements on this going back several years.

Of course it was pure invention.It was just an ever so slightly exaggerated play on your argument that the voting age should be lowered,which as i remember you were advocating during the lead up to, or in the aftermath of, the Brexit vote.But anyway,you've cleared things up by the "defineably,undeniably undemocratic" words in your post above. Labour won the February 1974 election by polling 11645616 votes compared to 11872180 polled by the Tories-ergo,the result met the your criteria and no doubt had the same poll and the same participants been transported to 2016 instead of 1974,that same criteria would have been applied by your good self in the interests of consistency.Good stuff.

How was my answer, graciously accepted by Greenskin - and we're hardly besties by anybody's definition, in any way an avoidance of the question posed?

Like I have said many times: "I've answered the question already".

Just to prove I haven't sneakily edited anything or some such here's the sodding thread.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

You answered the question (as you put it) before Greenskin had made you aware of Labour's victory.
Therefore you did not and still haven't answered the question "explicitly" as you claim.

The fact you won't, speaks volumes.

I'm done with you now.

Off you toddle....

You're done with me?

Rejoice!

Rickler wrote:

pepsipete wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

I've answered that already.

For God sake just say yes or no and put an end to it.  I am fed up with pages of bull over the two of you and your petty squabble.

...and I'm fed up clicking on 'Half time', only to find out there are no new posts worth reading, only another mind numbing entry in that game of yours that even a simpleton would find boring.

So there.

Well this simpleton finds the word game light hearted fun....not too taxing ....but better than a never ending moronic....."I will be right because I'm never wrong" slanging match that only proves that you obviously have nothing better to do with your life,

Moronic = Dumb or Stupid.........humm sounds about right.

"not too taxing"

LOl.