|
Post by lollygagger on Jul 15, 2017 20:35:45 GMT
Vile is a good one too.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2017 20:40:03 GMT
I quite like 'sanctimonious wanker'.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2017 20:42:08 GMT
I quite like 'sanctimonious wanker'. At the amount of practice you get, this does not surprise me. 😉
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2017 20:43:52 GMT
I think "Scum" is quite a good term of offense. Its short and to the point and related to water which is helpful on a boating forum.
Vile piece of odious sanctimonious scum?
|
|
|
Post by lollygagger on Jul 15, 2017 20:46:06 GMT
I think "Scum" is quite a good term of offense. Its short and to the point and related to water which is helpful on a boating forum. Vile piece of odious sanctimonious scum? leave out piece of and you have VOSS.👍
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2017 20:50:59 GMT
I quite like 'sanctimonious wanker'. At the amount of practice you get, this does not surprise me. 😉 Suits you too you 'sanctimonious odious wanking cretin.....'
|
|
|
Post by Saltysplash on Jul 16, 2017 23:39:49 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2017 14:10:23 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Jul 17, 2017 15:20:11 GMT
Ha Ha not attention seeking behaviour at all! Anyway "The money to fund contractor's." begs the question the contractor's what? Or do you not realise that an apostrophe is not used to indicate a plural?
Anyway, I think your point about non-VM moorings is twaddle. There is loads of armco etc with plenty of depth even for us at 32.5". Well maybe not on the KandA but that is an exception. When you make silly points about an imaginary drive to rid the cut of liveaboards by not dredging near the towpath, you lose credibility and thus your more valid point about excessive corporate expenditure is lost. Shame.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2017 16:34:22 GMT
Ha Ha not attention seeking behaviour at all! Anyway "The money to fund contractor's." begs the question the contractor's what? Or do you not realise that an apostrophe is not used to indicate a plural?
Anyway, I think your point about non-VM moorings is twaddle. There is loads of armco etc with plenty of depth even for us at 32.5". Well maybe not on the KandA but that is an exception. When you make silly points about an imaginary drive to rid the cut of liveaboards by not dredging near the towpath, you lose credibility and thus your more valid point about excessive corporate expenditure is lost. Shame.
Wassup muchas, you got a runny nose, or just full up😂
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2017 22:19:09 GMT
A well written piece.
I can see the connections you make and understand why you believe it.
I still think it is only one possible explanation, rather than the only possible explanation, but I shall follow with interest.
Rog
|
|
|
Post by naughtyfox on Jul 17, 2017 22:22:50 GMT
Here's some apostrophes to help jenlyn with his spelling:
' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '
That should last until Thursday.
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Jul 17, 2017 22:57:16 GMT
A well written piece. I can see the connections you make and understand why you believe it. I still think it is only one possible explanation, rather than the only possible explanation, but I shall follow with interest. Rog ... or to put it another way, you are a paranoid nutter!
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Jul 17, 2017 23:03:27 GMT
Here's some apostrophes to help jenlyn with his spelling: ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' That should last until Thursday. Well it's actually quite good to see that Steve has edited his contractor's. Now there is just the "several boat owner's", the multitude of possessive "it's" which should be its. Not to be confused with the "it's" which is correctly short for "it is" to go, and then it would be a well written piece - of fantasy!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2017 23:06:20 GMT
In fairness, when you link the individual issues he highlights, all of which actually exist, even I can understand his assertions.
Upto reading that piece I've not been able to see the connections.
Rog
PS Poor form to criticise spelling or grammar in my view, particularly as you were clearly able to comprehend his point, even if you disagree with it.
|
|