Blog powered by Typepad

« Dammit! | Main | Warning to commenters »

Thursday, 11 October 2007


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

"I">">I have decided to keep her name private"

Really? Why so coy all of a sudden?

Because, 'NIB', I was writing something personal concerning a lady which was also highly speculative.

"personal... also highly speculative"

Oh right - calumny, in other words.

So, why on earth did you put it on the internet - where even a juvenile idiot (etc) can find who you're talking about in eight seconds flat - instead of keeping it between yourself and the cat? Just couldn't help yourself, could you?

I *could* get into this game [Oh no you can't because I won't let you! DD]

You have succeeded where I never thought you would, NIB, that is, in being even more cretinous than usual.

I have not accused the lady concerned of anything remotely criminal, nor indeed, of any bad action. My remarks were personal and unflattering but that is all.

And please don't try being a smart-arse with your silly comments, they won't get past me, and they may provoke me to some unflattering remarks concerning you!

This is fantastic - I didn't even need to swear to get my comment censored this time! Let the casual reader decide what, and so on.

Why not answer *my* question for once - why did you put the post up *at all* if you don't want people to know who you are talking about? Looking for a new Rachel North, but without all the awkward 'answering back', perhaps?

I wrote it, 'NIB' (not that you really care), because, like everything else I write, it interested and intrigued me and I wanted to express my thoughts in writing.

Oh, and by the way, I have yet to receive any "awkward" answering back on this site. It's virtually all childish, ill-thought out rubbish that anyone could bat back one-handed whilst smoking a fag!

Yeah, apart from the "awkward" answering back that you have to either (a)censor (b)dismiss out of hand as 'childish' or (c)fend off with vague threats, rather than answering properly.

By the way, what dictionary do you get your definition of 'calumny' from? In what way is saying someone is "silly and misguided" enough that they "might well" be tempted by fascism *not* an attempt to damage their reputation? For the sake of your reputation (I'm not laughing, honest) you should take this post down, lest it comes back to bite you.

'NIB', this is the *last time* I answer your points here because they are both irrelevant and incorrect.

I used the words "silly and misguided" in a different context from the one you tried to link them to.

There is nothing wrong in being tempted into anything - it is what you do about it that matters, and this lady has done nothing.

Now go to bed and take more water with it in future.

Don't come the cornered rat: You said the woman "might well" join the fascist , on account of her politics and personal outlook. That's a damaging accusation, whether you care to admit it or not.

I won't bother trying to spell this out using analogies, as you'll only censor them.

"...whilst I talk to her she rather carefully avoids being drawn out"

Hmmm. Sounds familiar.

The comments to this entry are closed.