In article ,
Tim Watts wrote:
On 16/07/18 13:51, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Tim Watts wrote:
Sorry. Forgot you only read posts looking for something you can pick up
on. Perish the thought you might actually understand them.


No - you wrote something that was basically complete wibble.

If you had a point, and would like to try to restate it in a way that is
comprehend-able, then I'll answer.

I'd not expect you to change the habit of a lifetime.


So you didn't have a point then? If you did, any reasonable person would
have restated it.

Not much point since you didn't get it first time round.

Must admit to not realising you couldn't understand what was meant. Ah
well.

--
*Never miss a good chance to shut up.*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 17/07/18 14:14, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

Not much point since you didn't get it first time round.

Must admit to not realising you couldn't understand what was meant. Ah
well.



Right:


I said:
"I'm weeping that we have a governing class that is almost completely
comprised of careerist intellectually retarded ******s across all
political parties."

You said:
"So first past the post democracy is fine when a referendum gives the
result you want. But not when it comes to electing your MP."

I said:
"Er Dave - "FPTP" has no meaning in a binary referendum..."


Was there ever actually a point to what you said beyond a distracting
and irrelevant mention of FPTP?

Alright - I'll humour you in your "let's play guess my point..."


The best I can do, trying to think like you is that because general
election ballot papers have nothing but crap choices, ergo the
referendum had nothing but crap choices.

That would be akin to saying that in a field of cow dung piles, there
cannot be a fine banquet of a picnic set upon a table...


So having guessed your point, shredded the logic, it's your turn...