Viewing Thread:
"You think you can tell me what to do?"

You think you can tell me what to wear?
YOU BETTER GET READY TO BOW TO THE MASTERS

Cong_Woman wrote:
> The Masked Man wrote:
> Ouch. Thanks for that. I'm getting blood all over my shirt now.
> Humph..
>
> No worries im sure the gf will nurse it better for you

What girlfriend?

The Masked Man wrote:
> Ouch. Thanks for that. I'm getting blood all over my shirt now.
> Humph..

No worries im sure the gf will nurse it better for you

Cong_Woman wrote:
> Memorandum wrote:
> Everyone's sorry, you sloanies.
> Let's forget this whole silly affair, you bunch of kevs.
>
> The words pot kettle black springs to mind.. But burys hatchett in
> someones back!

Ouch. Thanks for that. I'm getting blood all over my shirt now. Humph.

Memorandum wrote:
> Everyone's sorry, you sloanies.
> Let's forget this whole silly affair, you bunch of kevs.

The words pot kettle black springs to mind.. But burys hatchett in someones back!

Everyone's sorry, you sloanies.
Let's forget this whole silly affair, you bunch of kevs.

I'm sorry too you chavs.

Apologies Memo, but I often quote a post and then go off at a tangent, speaking in general.

I did not mean to cause offence, but I know what I meant when I wrote it. If that makes sense.

mattributé wrote:
> That's the most sexest thing I've ever read.

Me? Sexest? Nah, I'm equal opportunities. That's why I want to fondle you.

The Masked Man wrote:
> YOU and YOUR used in the same sense as a rhetorical question. That
> is, applying to any and everyone whom it applies to.

This is all well and good, but let me get this straight; you think I'm paranoid and self obsessed because I think a post in which you reply to me saying "you" and "your" several times is directly addressing me? That's just ridiculous.

I think it's fairly safe to say that you know I'm addressing you, despite me not using your name once.

It's not my fault if you make your posts really unclear with regards to the person you're addressing.


> and you my good man don't seem to understand the ambiguities of the
> English language. Also I did NOT use 'smoething' to refer to people,
> rather to an unspecific subject, inferring wrestling,

I know this. That was my whole point. You said I was abusing wrestling and using that as an excuse to criticise people, which I clearly wasn't.

I never said anything about wrestling at all.

In fact, the only time I've criticised anyone was when Ant started his whole "I'm notable so I'm better than you" thing (which is the post you replied to).

That is why I defended my post in the way I did, because it looked like you were specifically addressing me and in doing so, you appeared to be accusing me of doing something I wasn't.

That's the most sexest thing I've ever read.