[Jack_]

Originally Posted by poppsywoppsy

If you find someone disagreeing with you patronizing, well not my problem. I disagree with others and they do not respond like you so perhaps less sensitivity might help.

Once again, there you go not reading my posts properly.

Originally Posted by Jack_

Disagree all you like

Originally Posted by Jack_

Again, I don't have a problem with people disagreeing with me - this is a forum after all.

Originally Posted by Jack_

I accept your alternative opinion.

Originally Posted by Jack_

I said variety is the spice of life in an earlier response to you.

Why are you making this so difficult? How many times am I going to have to repeat myself before you understand? It's pretty straightforward.

This, for context, was some of the tone of your original response to me:

Originally Posted by poppsywoppsy

what is so hard in not using profanities every other word unless your vocabulary is limited.

Originally Posted by poppsywoppsy

Why you felt the need to call Ann ****ing Widdicombe ... is not her problem but the person who is using it.

Originally Posted by poppsywoppsy

So it seems she is not the most hated, or she is the most boring but she is one of the most POPULAR persons in there at the moment, whether you like it or not.

Originally Posted by poppsywoppsy

Think on.

That's not even mentioning the numerous instances in which you tried to explain something I'd already said or agreed with in my first post. Especially trying to insinuate I didn't like Ann or found her boring when I'd literally said in the first line of my original post that I wanted her to win

You were patronising. You also didn't read my post properly, and tried to reiterate things I'd already said myself or put words into my mouth - I'm sure you've discovered this by now but it's one of the most irritating things I find about this forum.

So, you set the tone of the discussion. And I responded in kind. That's the way this works. You could've quite easily worded your response without the retorts I just quoted, and this could've been a productive and civilised discussion - I actually prefer that believe it or not, but if someone wants to make a debate hostile then that's the way it'll go. You made the call, not me.

Originally Posted by poppsywoppsy

I, have short shrift with such stuff and a forum is not the place to mind others having different views, I have no problem with your platitudes or provocations where none are called for.

For the umpteenth time, I don't care about others having differing views. I care about being spoken down to and patronised. All of my responses were a direct reaction to yours, they were all called for.

Originally Posted by poppsywoppsy

I asked where his Dad was because he wasn't there. Try not reading and surmising when it was a straightforward comment. I do think Andrew could benefit from a Fathers wisdom but am unaware of his family situation and asked where he was, nothing more or less.

The implication was more than clear and in fact you've explicitly stated it in the part I've just bolded, but nice try.

Andrew's father has no relevance to this situation whatsoever, if Ann had insinuated his father wouldn't be proud of him it would've been just as offensive.

Women are more than capable of raising children on their own, whether you're going to insinuate otherwise or not. It's not the 1950s anymore.

Originally Posted by poppsywoppsy

Your huge font was shouting and unecessary, just letting you know.

The huge font was because I really am fed up with people on this forum not reading my posts properly.

The patronising digs and overall tone of your original response were uncalled for and unnecessary, just letting you know.

Originally Posted by poppsywoppsy

I will give other poster a break from your reams of postings by letting you post to your hearts content by agreeing with yourself. I gave up after the first few lines and speedread until I fell asleep. A good cure for my insomnia, thank you very much.

Happily moving on, good luck

In other words - 'I can't find a way to prove you wrong so I'm going to give up rather than just admit I was wrong'. That's fair enough, I understand it can be difficult to apologise and to read more than a few lines - not everyone's reading comprehension is that strong.

Have a great day

Originally Posted by poppsywoppsy

You also could not see when Ann was called to the Diary room and passed Shane and Andrew in their so called playfight which THEY said they were aroused. Missed that out. You only saw a short clip.There are differing opinions about this but Ann hasn't shown herself to be untruthful.

This is literally fake news. If you believe the clip I posted is inaccurate and doesn't portray the whole scene, then the onus is on YOU to prove things occurred otherwise. Like I said, I am genuinely happy to be proven wrong but I didn't recall the incident happening like that and so sought out video evidence - and what I found showed nothing of the sort.