|
Post by Aloysius on Apr 9, 2023 22:54:56 GMT
Have you never been told that brevity is the soul of wit? I have provided the perfect two-word insult and still you complain.
|
|
|
Post by on Apr 9, 2023 22:55:58 GMT
Have you never been told that brevity is the soul of wit? I have provided the perfect two-word insult and still you complain. I know nothing about brevity. Well I do know one thing about it but that isn't for a family forum !
|
|
|
Post by Aloysius on Apr 9, 2023 22:59:26 GMT
The "vacuous inconsequential nobody" example does scan quite well; I suggest its 3-5-3 structure is key to success. Perhaps you can offer a comparable alternative.
|
|
|
Post by on Apr 9, 2023 22:59:38 GMT
"Quintessential prick" is actually alright. I think it needs to be something like "Quintessentially vacuous scumbag prick" otherwise there are not enough words with the letter U pronounced.
You are giving away your education here. Be careful letting education get the better of your imagination.
|
|
|
Post by on Apr 9, 2023 23:01:12 GMT
It is actually very important to use the letter U and also T in effective combinations.
Avoid verbs.
|
|
|
Post by Aloysius on Apr 9, 2023 23:03:01 GMT
I stopped smoking them a long time ago.
|
|
|
Post by on Apr 9, 2023 23:08:03 GMT
The really good thing with things like Gutless Invertebrate is that you are forcing the other person to think.
Firstly "what is an invertebrate?" secondly "Might they actually not have guts?"
It really puts one on the back foot. Class.
This is on another level to ordinary shit. The bloke is a poet and he doesn't sven know it.
At the end of the day you might think he is just some nutter on the internet but he knows his shit when it comes to invertebrates.
Never underestimate people.
|
|
|
Post by Aloysius on Apr 9, 2023 23:32:57 GMT
It's a double negative since both terms allude to cowardice. 'Witless invertebrate' would cover a wider spectrum of insult.
|
|
|
Post by Tony Dunkley on Apr 10, 2023 4:55:47 GMT
Can you provide some examples where it has been effective for the Environment Agency please. Examples needed of successful elimination of problems. I'm not talking about fining people I am talking about getting rid of problems.. You need to provide evidence for your assertion that enforcing byelaws is effective. as you have mentioned both the EA and the MLC it will be easy to find this evidence. I didn't claim or say that enforcing Byelaws is wholly successful in eliminating the sort of problems that navigation authorities can have with rogue boatowners or abandoned or derelict boats. What I did say was this :- "The spurious C&RT Ltd argument against prosecution under the General Canal Byelaws is the same fallacious drivel that was first published by BWB in 2010 at the instigation of a thoroughly contemptible specimen called Nigel Johnson - the then head of BWB's legal department, . . and the inspirational role model for C&RT Ltd Company Secretary Tom Deards and the willing gang of crooks and liars who work under his direction and under the cover of C&RT Ltd's so-called Legal & Governance Services. It - the fallacious argument for the abuse and misuse of statutory boat removal powers in preference to the use of the legitimate powers available for specific breaches of licensing related laws - was contrived rubbish back then, . . and it's still just as much contrived rubbish today.
Prosecutions under Byelaws, . . in conjunction with the additional actions prescribed under relevant statute can be very effective, and at negligible or comparatively low cost to the navigation authority. This simple unarguable fact has been demonstrated and proven on numerous occasions by the EA and the Middle Level Commissioners, . . and, unlike C&RT Ltd's extravagant money wasting actions, is wholly lawful and legitimate." Before embarking on any more time wasting, pointless and ill-conceived quibbling, . . or further lame attempts to excuse C&RT Ltd's now very well documented corporate disdain for its own governing statutes and secondary legislation, . . you should first read back through Nigel Moore's many posts on the very same subject.
|
|
|
Post by Aloysius on Apr 10, 2023 5:45:03 GMT
I recall the inestimable Mr Moore once commented that he considered the methods CRT chooses to pursue to be 'heavy-handed' but not illegal, as the inexecrable Mr Dunkley professes.
|
|
|
Post by thebfg on Apr 10, 2023 8:07:27 GMT
George had a few weeks to whack a defence in. Why didn't Tony do so? Be a little more precise and explicit. A Defence to what exactly, . . on whose behalf, mine or George Ward's . . or were you really meaning to ask about an Appeal ? If you were querying why I didn't, or couldn't, act on George Ward's behalf, . . that question has been dealt with quite recently. Yours in relation to HD. Why didn't you put in a defence when CRT asked a court for permission to section 8 HD?
|
|
|
Post by thebfg on Apr 10, 2023 8:11:00 GMT
Could have worked but for the BSS issue. I find it amazing that anybody at all still thinks Dunkley's bullshit has any credibility. We will never know now, but we could have known one way or the other.
|
|
|
Post by Aloysius on Apr 10, 2023 8:16:07 GMT
I find it amazing that anybody at all still thinks Dunkley's bullshit has any credibility. We will never know now, but we could have known one way or the other. Piffle
|
|
|
Post by thebfg on Apr 10, 2023 8:18:57 GMT
We will never know now, but we could have known one way or the other. Piffle Thats upto you.
|
|
|
Post by Aloysius on Apr 10, 2023 8:30:16 GMT
|
|