tjj
|
Edited Jan 23, 2013, 22:58
Re: Alexander Keiller's Avebury
Jan 23, 2013, 22:57
|
|
Harryshill wrote: tjj wrote: Littlestone wrote: Well, possibly, if you express an opinion on a forum and people ask you questions to elicit further clarification then (as a contributor) you sort of have an obligation to answer...
Well you could do what you've been doing to me for years on this forum Littlestone and just blank them plus (behind the scenes) encourage everyone else to do the same. Why don't you all fuck off to bed and leave HH alone - perhaps he'll do the same.
Please don't concern yourself in this issue.
I'm a big boy any know what I am doing. Honestly !!!
I believe you know what your doing all right! Its all starting to feel like a school playground. I do wonder why there are not more women on this forum but with all this testosterone flying around its no wonder. Just stop!
|
bladup
|
Re: Alexander Keiller's Avebury
Jan 23, 2013, 22:58
|
|
Mustard wrote: Harryshill wrote: Littlestone wrote: Harryshill wrote: Littlestone wrote: The only rules that are relevant are ones pertaining to the above question...
You really have to understand that here, you are nothing more than anybody else. You don't own me. I don't have to follow your rules.
I don't recognise your authority,.
I don’t have any authority here. You, however, may have a responsibility to justify your opinions.
No I don't.
And there we have it. All mouth, no contribution. Trolling.
Yes Yes Yes, offers only negatives, never anything positive.
|
Harryshill
|
Re: In summary...
Jan 23, 2013, 22:59
|
|
bladup wrote: Harryshill wrote: harestonesdown wrote: Harryshill wrote: harestonesdown wrote: Harryshill wrote: harestonesdown wrote: Harryshill wrote: LOL.
Gentlemen. If you think that the people that read these posts are stupid then I think your sorely mistaken.
Who said anyone is stupid, or even inferred it. ?
*scratches head smiley*
Implication.
End of the provable day. Every thing we say is being watched by people that might make the difference. For or against. They aren't stupid, they will know what is unreasonable or not.
Even more reason to keep it civil then eh.
That's what I have tried to do. Been call narrow minded, nimby, implied that I am,stupid etc, negative. Hell, you fill in the gaps.
Why, because I don't want to see the restoration of the Avebury stones. Over kill or what? And people wonder why there is less participation in debate.
To be fair you dangle a good bait. sorry you've become the victim. :)
I don't give a f#ck that thats the case. Avebury means more than that.
It's all on purpose, you're trying to make it look like you're clever and defending the place from the front, but i don't believe you!!!
What !!!
|
Harryshill
|
Re: Alexander Keiller's Avebury
Jan 23, 2013, 23:01
|
|
tjj wrote: Harryshill wrote: tjj wrote: Littlestone wrote: Well, possibly, if you express an opinion on a forum and people ask you questions to elicit further clarification then (as a contributor) you sort of have an obligation to answer...
Well you could do what you've been doing to me for years on this forum Littlestone and just blank them plus (behind the scenes) encourage everyone else to do the same. Why don't you all fuck off to bed and leave HH alone - perhaps he'll do the same.
Please don't concern yourself in this issue.
I'm a big boy any know what I am doing. Honestly !!!
I believe you know what your doing all right! Its all starting to feel like a school playground. I do wonder why there are not more women on this forum but with all this testosterone flying around its no wonder. Just stop!
Done.
|
bladup
|
Re: In summary...
Jan 23, 2013, 23:03
|
|
Harryshill wrote: bladup wrote: Harryshill wrote: harestonesdown wrote: Harryshill wrote: harestonesdown wrote: Harryshill wrote: harestonesdown wrote: Harryshill wrote: LOL.
Gentlemen. If you think that the people that read these posts are stupid then I think your sorely mistaken.
Who said anyone is stupid, or even inferred it. ?
*scratches head smiley*
Implication.
End of the provable day. Every thing we say is being watched by people that might make the difference. For or against. They aren't stupid, they will know what is unreasonable or not.
Even more reason to keep it civil then eh.
That's what I have tried to do. Been call narrow minded, nimby, implied that I am,stupid etc, negative. Hell, you fill in the gaps.
Why, because I don't want to see the restoration of the Avebury stones. Over kill or what? And people wonder why there is less participation in debate.
To be fair you dangle a good bait. sorry you've become the victim. :)
I don't give a f#ck that thats the case. Avebury means more than that.
It's all on purpose, you're trying to make it look like you're clever and defending the place from the front, but i don't believe you!!!
What !!!
That you're just defending Avebury, to make it stay the same for future generations, that's all.
|
tiompan
|
Re: In summary...
Jan 23, 2013, 23:04
|
|
nigelswift wrote: Well the point for me is that I'm defending my gggg grandkids heritage against marauding 21st Century putter-uppers!
Some would describe that as a positive , broad minded , out of the box point ?
|
Harryshill
|
Re: Alexander Keiller's Avebury
Jan 23, 2013, 23:08
|
Well, I desided from the start not to give reasons for not digging up Avebury as the reasons were to my mind quite obvious.
I thought the best way to show opposition to restoration, was to allow those those that supported it to have their say, and they have.
Its done as far as I'm concerned.
|
bladup
|
Re: Alexander Keiller's Avebury
Jan 23, 2013, 23:09
|
|
Sanctuary wrote: bladup wrote: Sanctuary wrote: Whichever way you look at this the thread has certainly captured the imagination judging by the 350 or so posts!
You are very good at getting people chatting Roy.
I'm trying to build up my expletives library Paul :-)
You're in the right place alright.
|
nigelswift
|
Re: In summary...
Jan 23, 2013, 23:11
|
|
Thanks, but it's not out of the box if you think of Avebury as jointly owned by 50 generations, which I tend to do. Once that's accepted the idea of putting up more than one stone in the next 50 years becomes preposterously greedy and vandalistic!
|
harestonesdown
|
Re:Going round in circles.
Jan 23, 2013, 23:11
|
|
So, about these stones then. :^)
|
