Originally posted by FMFOriginally posted by FMF (Page 11)
Interesting edit of my sentence there, Grampy Bobby. You deliberately lopped off the first six words and did not quote it as the question it was. 😕
Here is the quotation [b]not tampered with by you:
"So you personally don't believe that Grampy Bobby used some privately divulged information about Seitse's health to score a cheap point in a forum dispu ...[text shortened]... ot being able to produce a link/thread/page number. I did so on page 3 Thread 167386.
"So you personally don't believe that Grampy Bobby used some privately divulged information about Seitse's health to score a cheap point in a forum dispute a couple of months ago? And you also believe I was flat out lying about that incident prior to me apologizing for not being able to provide a link? Just to be clear."
__________________
"I have already apologized for not being able to produce a link/thread/page number. I did so on page 3 Thread 167386." FMF (Page 12)
__________________
Then why in the world are you still posting the statement [in bold above] in this thread on February 7, 2016 two days later?
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyIt's a question Grampy Bobby, not a statement.
Then why in the world are you still posting the statement [in bold above] in this thread on February 7, 2016 two days later?
To Landisqueen170: "So you personally don't believe that Grampy Bobby used some privately divulged information about Seitse's health to score a cheap point in a forum dispute a couple of months ago?"
It's a question about what she believes.
You ought not to have tampered with what I asked her - what I typed - in order to score your cheap point.
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyWhat slander?
“When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser.” ―Socrates
Like I said before, I have already apologized for not being able to produce a link/thread/page number.
I did so on page 3 Thread 167386.
You know full well what my belief and memory is ~ I stated it clearly,and would not have been dishonest about stating it.
Me apologizing for not giving you a page number and doesn't make my memory of the incident go away.
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyYou repeatedly chastise other people for inappropriate editing of other people's posts and yet here you are in this one and especially in the previous iteration, doing exactly that! Completely changing the meaning of FMF's question to Landisqueen170.
Originally posted by FMF (Page 11)
"So you personally don't believe that [b]Grampy Bobby used some privately divulged information about Seitse's health to score a cheap point in a forum dispute a couple of months ago? And you also believe I was flat out lying about that incident prior to me apologizing for not being able to provide a link? J ...[text shortened]... u still posting the statement [in bold above] in this thread on February 7, 2016 two days later?[/b]
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyWhy, when challenged about your behaviour, do you immediately hide behind copy/pasted quotations. Why can't you address your detractors directly. You seem to have no difficulty in doing this in PM's, (like the ones you replied to me about this weekend).
“When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser.” ―Socrates
Is this because you are concerned that you will not be able to stand your ground in the face of public scrutiny?
Originally posted by FMF"I might not be able to."
I might not be able to. I'll have a go. Do you think trying to bring the parents and the wife and family of another poster into a forum dispute ~ in an effort to score some sort of rhetorical cheap shot ~ is appropriate?
Probably because I misinterpreted your meaning.
"Do you think trying to bring the parents and the wife and family of another poster into a forum dispute ~ in an effort to score some sort of rhetorical cheap shot ~ is appropriate?"
Absolutely not! Frankly, I really don't think you would do that, which is why I said above that I probably misinterpreted your meaning. Since then I read your public forum posts ten pages deep to try and get an understanding of you.
I can't bring myself to think you have ulterior motives, but in spite of your obvious talents and education I think you are a product of secular and humanist ideologies. Not saying that's all bad. You are apparently well informed. Much more than I.
I trust though that you'll understand what I mean when I say that you are spiritually off the mark, that is, based on an objective biblical standard. 😉
I, on the other hand, do have an ulterior motive, which really isn't ulterior at all. I'd rather look like a fool than deny the truth.