dennis@home wrote:
"John Rumm" wrote in message
...
On 18/11/2010 19:30, dennis@home wrote:


"John Rumm" wrote in message
...

Not in the last 20 years... As to "so what?", don't you feel any
responsibility to contribute accurate information if you are going
to post your opinion as fact on public fora?

If i were answering a question then yes I would try to be accurate,
that's why I don't answer questions when I don't know anything
about it.

There seems to be some 1984 esq revisionism going on here. In case
you forget, you were answering a question, and now by your own
admission it was on something you don't know much about.

What question was I answering?

You couldn't resist sticking your oar in you spineless little **** - and you
spouted bollox yet again.


When its general discussion then so what? Anyone can be wrong and it
would be just as foolish to base anything critical on one unknown
persons statements as it would to rely on a stranger in the pub.

So you seem to be saying we should treat your proclamations with the
same degree of respect as those of any unknown stranger in a pub?

If you want to quote a subset then I suppose its true even if its
somewhat limited.

Wriggle like the worm you are Dennis.


--
Dave - The Medway Handyman
www.medwayhandyman.co.uk