Koran burning will endanger US lives: Petraeus

[AAFitz]

As an AMERICAN, I support the display of opinion, though burning a K'ran or insulting anyone's religion in such an abrasive way is idiotic, because it tends to backfire heavily. In fact, letting these idiots do as they will is probably the best argument against such acts.

However, as a CHRISTIAN, I am always insulted when someone tries to claim they are acting under direction of my lord when committing hateful acts.

I love God so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him

[notyou2]

As an AMERICAN, I support the display of opinion, though burning a K'ran or insulting anyone's religion in such an abrasive way is idiotic, because it tends to backfire heavily. In fact, letting these idiots do as they will is probably the best argument against such acts.

However, as a CHRISTIAN, I am always insulted when someone tries to claim they are acting under direction of my lord when committing hateful acts.

I love God so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him

I got a warning for a similar spam post in your retirement thread AAF. Did you get a warning too?

[AAFitz]

As an AMERICAN, I support the display of opinion, though burning a K'ran or insulting anyone's religion in such an abrasive way is idiotic, because it tends to backfire heavily. In fact, letting these idiots do as they will is probably the best argument against such acts.

However, as a CHRISTIAN, I am always insulted when someone tries to claim they are acting under direction of my lord when committing hateful acts.

I love God so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him

I got a warning for a similar spam post in your retirement thread AAF. Did you get a warning too?

Its hardly spam. It has a clear and on topic satirical purpose, unlike your post here and completely unlike your post you got warned for. In any case, feel free to pm me if youd like to discuss off topic discussions further. Id hate to see you warned again so soon. This thread is about radicals burning a koran, and my post shows the circular logic they use when doing such things. I suppose not all see such subtleties for what they are though.

[Woodruff]

As an AMERICAN, I support the display of opinion, though burning a K'ran or insulting anyone's religion in such an abrasive way is idiotic, because it tends to backfire heavily. In fact, letting these idiots do as they will is probably the best argument against such acts.

However, as a CHRISTIAN, I am always insulted when someone tries to claim they are acting under direction of my lord when committing hateful acts.

I love God so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him

How is that a relevant or reasonable response to PLAYER's statements?

[AAFitz]

As an AMERICAN, I support the display of opinion, though burning a K'ran or insulting anyone's religion in such an abrasive way is idiotic, because it tends to backfire heavily. In fact, letting these idiots do as they will is probably the best argument against such acts.

However, as a CHRISTIAN, I am always insulted when someone tries to claim they are acting under direction of my lord when committing hateful acts.

I love God so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him

How is that a relevant or reasonable response to PLAYER's statements?

Apparently youre one of those who cant see the simplicity. First its not a response. Its relevant however as a continuation of the same idea:

However, as a CHRISTIAN, I am always insulted when someone tries to claim they are acting under direction of my lord when committing hateful acts.

Secondly, Its representation of the circular logic of the exact people Player is talking about here, IE those who break Gods law, in the hypocritical crusade to protect it. Its similar to the I do cocaine, so I can do more work, so I can buy more cocaine ads of the eighties, though, not exactly the same.

Most importantly, there is no reason to suggest it needs to be reasonable, and quite frankly, you are very, very lucky that is the case.

I will point out however, that you are off topic here, because you are really discussing forum policy in a thread about koran burning and your post has nothing to do with that whatsoever, and as such, is spamming, the exact thing, you are incorrectly suggesting I may be doing. I would further suggest that as a teacher no less, you perhaps put a little more thought into your posts before posting such things, but that of course, is up to you. Feel free to pm me if this explanation is too complicated, or, perhaps not complicated enough for you. You also might want to check out the post he was comparing it to. You might see a difference.

[GabonX]

That would be a good point if there was something in Christianity which would indicate that burning a Koran violated God's laws.

I'm not aware of any such thing, but it's always fun watching people that pride themselves on their atheism give lessons on theology..

[AAFitz]

That would be a good point if there was something in Christianity which would indicate that burning a Koran violated God's laws.

I'm not aware of any such thing, but it's always fun watching people that pride themselves on their atheism give lessons on theology..

Gods laws are of course open to interpretation which is usually where any conflict ensues. However, in this case, its easy to argue that burning the book that a massive population holds as holy and dear, would indeed violate many of the laws of Christianity, or even perhaps the entire overall message of Christ himself in fact. Some like myself who is fully versed in Christianity as an altar boy, boyscout, and even a Christian preparatory high school, with plenty of understanding of such teachings, probably have much more fun watching those who actually claim to believe in Christianity, not even understand its teachings. Thank you for another opportunity.

Atheism, by the way means not necessarily believing in a deity. It means nothing about believing in the teachings of a particular religion. That is also a point overlooked by self-righteous believers quite often. I enjoy watching that happen as well, and again, thank you.

[GabonX]

Some like myself who is fully versed in Christianity as an altar boy, boyscout, and even a Christian preparatory high school, with plenty of understanding of such teachings, probably have much more fun watching those who actually claim to believe in Christianity, not even understand its teachings. Thank you for another opportunity.

A swing and a miss!

Gods laws are of course open to interpretation which is usually where any conflict ensues. However, in this case, its easy to argue that burning the book that a massive population holds as holy and dear, would indeed violate many of the laws of Christianity, or even perhaps the entire overall message of Christ in fact.

The "interpretation" argument holds some water, but more often than not the people who make that argument are those who find that there is something they disagree with in their chosen religious text and rather than abandon their religion they cop out and pretend that those words don't mean what they clearly do mean.

What Christian laws indicate that burning a book perceived as being satanic literature from a false prophet would violate God's laws? Be specific...

I'm not saying that nothing like that exists in Christianity, but I'm certainly not aware if it does. The Bible orders Christians to be peaceful towards people of other faiths (because God will get them in the after life), but I'm not aware of anything which indicates that Christians need to respect the beliefs of others..

So please, educate us.

[AAFitz]

Some like myself who is fully versed in Christianity as an altar boy, boyscout, and even a Christian preparatory high school, with plenty of understanding of such teachings, probably have much more fun watching those who actually claim to believe in Christianity, not even understand its teachings. Thank you for another opportunity.

A swing and a miss!

Gods laws are of course open to interpretation which is usually where any conflict ensues. However, in this case, its easy to argue that burning the book that a massive population holds as holy and dear, would indeed violate many of the laws of Christianity, or even perhaps the entire overall message of Christ in fact.

The "interpretation" argument holds some water, but more often than not the people who make that argument are those who find that there is something they disagree with in their chosen religious text and rather than abandon their religion they cop out and pretend that those words don't mean what they clearly do mean.

What Christian laws indicate that burning a book perceived as being satanic literature from a false prophet would violate God's laws? Be specific...



I'm not saying that nothing like that exists in Christianity, but I'm certainly not aware if it does. The Bible orders Christians to be peaceful towards people of other faiths (because God will get them in the after life), but I'm not aware of anything which indicates that Christians need to respect the beliefs of others..

So please, educate us.

I am not hear to educate anyone. I am here to laugh at those like yourself who are not educated, or better, claim to be.

If you are so ignorant as to not see the hatred that this book burning was meant to, and will inspire, and thereby be an act of aggression that most agree is against the entire teaching of Christ, that that's up to you. I myself suggest you educate yourself in the teaching of your own religion that you seem to think you understand, but clearly do not. Sorry I cant help, but there's a lot of copies of the bible out there for you to read. Good luck and sorry I couldn't be of more assistance. Perhaps I will one day be punished for refusing to shepherd sheep in obvious need.

[Woodruff]

As an AMERICAN, I support the display of opinion, though burning a K'ran or insulting anyone's religion in such an abrasive way is idiotic, because it tends to backfire heavily. In fact, letting these idiots do as they will is probably the best argument against such acts.

However, as a CHRISTIAN, I am always insulted when someone tries to claim they are acting under direction of my lord when committing hateful acts.

I love God so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him

How is that a relevant or reasonable response to PLAYER's statements?

Apparently youre one of those who cant see the simplicity.

The simplicity? You appear to be accusing PLAYER of having the attitude within your sarcasm, since you did it as a direct response to her post. THAT is "the simplicity".

First its not a response.

Then you shouldn't have quoted her statements, because that certainly gives the appearance that it is a response to her statements.

I will point out however, that you are off topic here, because you are really discussing forum policy in a thread about koran burning and your post has nothing to do with that whatsoever, and as such, is spamming, the exact thing, you are incorrectly suggesting I may be doing.

Report me then, because I disagree with that entirely. Let the mods decide.

I would further suggest that as a teacher no less, you perhaps put a little more thought into your posts before posting such things, but that of course, is up to you.

As a teacher, I believe in responses that are relevant and reasonable. Despite your attempts at explanation, yours is neither, as regards PLAYER's statements.

Feel free to pm me if this explanation is too complicated, or, perhaps not complicated enough for you. You also might want to check out the post he was comparing it to. You might see a difference.

He?

[AAFitz]

As an AMERICAN, I support the display of opinion, though burning a K'ran or insulting anyone's religion in such an abrasive way is idiotic, because it tends to backfire heavily. In fact, letting these idiots do as they will is probably the best argument against such acts.

However, as a CHRISTIAN, I am always insulted when someone tries to claim they are acting under direction of my lord when committing hateful acts.

I love God so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him

How is that a relevant or reasonable response to PLAYER's statements?

Apparently youre one of those who cant see the simplicity.

The simplicity? You appear to be accusing PLAYER of having the attitude within your sarcasm, since you did it as a direct response to her post. THAT is "the simplicity".

First its not a response.

Then you shouldn't have quoted her statements, because that certainly gives the appearance that it is a response to her statements.

I will point out however, that you are off topic here, because you are really discussing forum policy in a thread about koran burning and your post has nothing to do with that whatsoever, and as such, is spamming, the exact thing, you are incorrectly suggesting I may be doing.

Report me then, because I disagree with that entirely. Let the mods decide.

I would further suggest that as a teacher no less, you perhaps put a little more thought into your posts before posting such things, but that of course, is up to you.

As a teacher, I believe in responses that are relevant and reasonable. Despite your attempts at explanation, yours is neither, as regards PLAYER's statements.

Feel free to pm me if this explanation is too complicated, or, perhaps not complicated enough for you. You also might want to check out the post he was comparing it to. You might see a difference.

He?

I wont waste time with the rest of your opinions, but yes. I am male.

[Woodruff]

That would be a good point if there was something in Christianity which would indicate that burning a Koran violated God's laws.
I'm not aware of any such thing, but it's always fun watching people that pride themselves on their atheism give lessons on theology..

Would this then be a case of "God's laws vs. Jesus' teachings"? Because I don't believe such an action would be approved by Jesus, based on his teachings in the Bible.

[AAFitz]

As an AMERICAN, I support the display of opinion, though burning a K'ran or insulting anyone's religion in such an abrasive way is idiotic, because it tends to backfire heavily. In fact, letting these idiots do as they will is probably the best argument against such acts.

However, as a CHRISTIAN, I am always insulted when someone tries to claim they are acting under direction of my lord when committing hateful acts.

I love God so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him

How is that a relevant or reasonable response to PLAYER's statements?

Apparently youre one of those who cant see the simplicity.

The simplicity? You appear to be accusing PLAYER of having the attitude within your sarcasm, since you did it as a direct response to her post. THAT is "the simplicity".

First its not a response.

Then you shouldn't have quoted her statements, because that certainly gives the appearance that it is a response to her statements.

I will point out however, that you are off topic here, because you are really discussing forum policy in a thread about koran burning and your post has nothing to do with that whatsoever, and as such, is spamming, the exact thing, you are incorrectly suggesting I may be doing.

Report me then, because I disagree with that entirely. Let the mods decide.

I would further suggest that as a teacher no less, you perhaps put a little more thought into your posts before posting such things, but that of course, is up to you.

As a teacher, I believe in responses that are relevant and reasonable. Despite your attempts at explanation, yours is neither, as regards PLAYER's statements.

Feel free to pm me if this explanation is too complicated, or, perhaps not complicated enough for you. You also might want to check out the post he was comparing it to. You might see a difference.

He?

I disagree.

[Woodruff]

I love God so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him

How is that a relevant or reasonable response to PLAYER's statements?

Apparently youre one of those who cant see the simplicity.

The simplicity? You appear to be accusing PLAYER of having the attitude within your sarcasm, since you did it as a direct response to her post. THAT is "the simplicity".

First its not a response.

Then you shouldn't have quoted her statements, because that certainly gives the appearance that it is a response to her statements.

I will point out however, that you are off topic here, because you are really discussing forum policy in a thread about koran burning and your post has nothing to do with that whatsoever, and as such, is spamming, the exact thing, you are incorrectly suggesting I may be doing.

Report me then, because I disagree with that entirely. Let the mods decide.

I would further suggest that as a teacher no less, you perhaps put a little more thought into your posts before posting such things, but that of course, is up to you.

As a teacher, I believe in responses that are relevant and reasonable. Despite your attempts at explanation, yours is neither, as regards PLAYER's statements.

Feel free to pm me if this explanation is too complicated, or, perhaps not complicated enough for you. You also might want to check out the post he was comparing it to. You might see a difference.

He?

I wont waste time with the rest of your opinions, but yes. I am male.

You refer to yourself in the third person? I guess that's what threw me...I've never seen you do that before. And now I have no idea what you mean by "the post he was comparing it to", since you didn't compare ANYTHING AT ALL in your post I was responding to.

[Woodruff]

He?

I disagree.

Interesting that you changed your statement...I guess the simplicity was too much for you?

[AAFitz]

He?

I disagree.

Interesting that you changed your statement...I guess the simplicity was too much for you?

I have many responses. The next one was explaining that I have no fear player wont be as foolish as you and misunderstanding my post.

[Woodruff]

He?

I disagree.

Interesting that you changed your statement...I guess the simplicity was too much for you?

I have many responses. The next one was explaining that I have no fear player wont be as foolish as you and misunderstanding my post.

For someone who so blithely accused me of being off-topic, you're sure quick to add flaming to the thread.

[AAFitz]

He?

I disagree.

Interesting that you changed your statement...I guess the simplicity was too much for you?

I have many responses. The next one was explaining that I have no fear player wont be as foolish as you and misunderstanding my post.

For someone who so blithely accused me of being off-topic, you're sure quick to add flaming to the thread.

Thats not flaming. Im explaining why I didnt bother quoting her. I know she will not be so foolish as to not understand I was not being sarcastic to her. Im sorry you are, but clearly, you completely misunderstood what I wrote, so its the only conclusion I can make.

In any case, since you dont seem able to understand what Im writing, im just going to have to ignore your follow up questions. The complete explanation is right there already.

[Woodruff]

I disagree.

Interesting that you changed your statement...I guess the simplicity was too much for you?

I have many responses. The next one was explaining that I have no fear player wont be as foolish as you and misunderstanding my post.

For someone who so blithely accused me of being off-topic, you're sure quick to add flaming to the thread.

Thats not flaming. Im explaining why I didnt bother quoting her.

Except you DID quote her. That is precisely my point...that is what gave the appearance that you were responding directly to her post. This isn't a difficult concept.

I know she will not be so foolish as to not understand I was not being sarcastic to her. Im sorry you are, but clearly, you completely misunderstood what I wrote, so its the only conclusion I can make.
In any case, since you dont seem able to understand what Im writing, im just going to have to ignore your follow up questions. The complete explanation is right there already.

Yes, ignoring my follow-up questions will certainly make the problem go away. Well done!

At least you took your flaming to PMs. I'm really disappointed in you AAFitz...you're better than this.

[AAFitz]

Yes, ignoring my follow-up questions will certainly make the problem go away. Well done!

At least you took your flaming to PMs. I'm really disappointed in you AAFitz...you're better than this.

I dissapointed you? So what?

Im really sorry I have to ignore your questions because you dont seem able to understand some pretty simple concepts and logic. Ive had to do this in the past. Your questions simply ask what I've already answered, so there's no reason to assume youll understand it if I explain them again.

As far as flaming in a PM... It was a serious question. I have my answer, thanks. In any case, my entire explanation is there. If you dont agree, or cant understand it there are no more words left that can help you out with that.

[AAFitz]

Except you DID quote her. That is precisely my point...that is what gave the appearance that you were responding directly to her post. This isn't a difficult concept.

Lmfao. Is it a difficult concept to understand that I quoted her because I agreed and continued on with her thought then? Perhaps for you it is, but some actually agree with other people in here quite often, and as it turns out I agree with player very often, and sometimes even quote her. In this case, I posted an example of what she was talking about. Again, truly sorry it was over your head.

[Woodruff]

Except you DID quote her. That is precisely my point...that is what gave the appearance that you were responding directly to her post. This isn't a difficult concept.

Lmfao. Is it a difficult concept to understand that I quoted her because I agreed and continued on with her thought then? Perhaps for you it is, but some actually agree with other people in here quite often, and as it turns out I agree with player very often, and sometimes even quote her. In this case, I posted an example of what she was talking about. Again, truly sorry it was over your head.

You can't even seem to figure out whether you quoted her or not...and you're talking about it being over my head?

It's a very simple concept that someone is quoted so that you may respond directly to them. If you had agreed with her, you certainly did nothing to make that apparent. It would have been far more effective for you to quote someone for whom your response would have made sense from a satirical perspective, since you claim that was the intent.

[AAFitz]

Except you DID quote her. That is precisely my point...that is what gave the appearance that you were responding directly to her post. This isn't a difficult concept.

Lmfao. Is it a difficult concept to understand that I quoted her because I agreed and continued on with her thought then? Perhaps for you it is, but some actually agree with other people in here quite often, and as it turns out I agree with player very often, and sometimes even quote her. In this case, I posted an example of what she was talking about. Again, truly sorry it was over your head.

You can't even seem to figure out whether you quoted her or not...and you're talking about it being over my head?

It's a very simple concept that someone is quoted so that you may respond directly to them. If you had agreed with her, you certainly did nothing to make that apparent. It would have been far more effective for you to quote someone for whom your response would have made sense from a satirical perspective, since you claim that was the intent.

Again, Im sorry you misunderstood or disagree with my writing style. In any case, feel free to respond to my pms on the subject as opposed to wasting space on this forum about your misunderstanding.

[Woodruff]

Except you DID quote her. That is precisely my point...that is what gave the appearance that you were responding directly to her post. This isn't a difficult concept.

Lmfao. Is it a difficult concept to understand that I quoted her because I agreed and continued on with her thought then? Perhaps for you it is, but some actually agree with other people in here quite often, and as it turns out I agree with player very often, and sometimes even quote her. In this case, I posted an example of what she was talking about. Again, truly sorry it was over your head.

You can't even seem to figure out whether you quoted her or not...and you're talking about it being over my head?

It's a very simple concept that someone is quoted so that you may respond directly to them. If you had agreed with her, you certainly did nothing to make that apparent. It would have been far more effective for you to quote someone for whom your response would have made sense from a satirical perspective, since you claim that was the intent.

Again, Im sorry you misunderstood or disagree with my writing style. In any case, feel free to respond to my pms on the subject as opposed to wasting space on this forum about your misunderstanding.

As far as your PMs are concerned, I wish you'd just go ahead and get it over with now. Why wait? Other than the missed opportunity to bait me into a longer vacation, of course.

[Metsfanmax]

This thread: