The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3049868.stm
--
Report due today.
Mentions the facts in nice, concise and clear points.
Of course, you could argue that the BBC is biased thanks to Alistair Campbell's comments.
Or you could argue that Campbell's tactics are to divert attention and interest away from the fundemental issues and get everyone concentrating on 45 mins and "sexed up".
I'll only say that Campbell is not an elected official, merely an independantly appointed advisor for Blair. A Spin Doctor who's job it is to minimise damage and put government in a favourable light.
He certainly deserves a raise, whatever the result.
--
Report due today.
Mentions the facts in nice, concise and clear points.
Of course, you could argue that the BBC is biased thanks to Alistair Campbell's comments.
Or you could argue that Campbell's tactics are to divert attention and interest away from the fundemental issues and get everyone concentrating on 45 mins and "sexed up".
I'll only say that Campbell is not an elected official, merely an independantly appointed advisor for Blair. A Spin Doctor who's job it is to minimise damage and put government in a favourable light.
He certainly deserves a raise, whatever the result.
Page:
Goatboy is an artist.
Well.. it would make sense.
http://www.broadband-my-ass.com/ schlabo/potd.pl?day=7&month=7&year=2003
Well.. it would make sense.
http://www.broadband-my-ass.com/ schlabo/potd.pl?day=7&month=7&year=2003
Practical Magic wrote:
>
>
> Okay, you post what you reckon I believe and I'll tell you why. The
> fact is I don't put much effort in on here to be honest, because I
> know how these topics usually go. In real life, in my university work,
> I can argue points well and rarely drop below a first grade in any
> argued piece of work, maybe I could post it here if you're interested
> ? I've argued against dependency theory as a Third World concept, on
> Nationalism and it's course, Urban development and capitalism,
> Colonialism in the 18th century, a whole range of topics. Right now
> I'm researching a dissertation about the virtual worlds contained
> within games and the representations contained in them, including the
> works of Baudrillard, Heidegger, even old Plato and scores more
> sources. Half of the problem is the best references for arguments are
> not on the internet, but in texts, and it's rather hard to use them in
> arguments on here as many books I have I seriously doubt others have
> access to or would want to buy. I'm not being snobby, just I doubt
> many of you have even heard of Fighting For The Future or others...
None of which explains why, when trying to argue your point, you repeat yourself over and over and over. Your range of intellectual studies is impressive, but this is a webboard and anything posted here is judged on what is provided here. Not on whatever self-proclaimed academic brilliance the poster is responsible for at uni. If you want to be taken seriously (and despite your protestations, you clearly do), either put up or shut up.
>
> Wel you commented on my own, by your rating, low quality supposed
> insult, double standards, non ?
Not really; I went further than that, but you clipped that. Must have went against what you were saying, eh Bell?
>
> Actually a fair few people have said that of our and Goatboy's
> continuing spat, IB for one...
IB? Right...so him and? Cos, y'know, I've seen IB call black white when he's in the mood to be awkward.
>
>
> Okay, you post what you reckon I believe and I'll tell you why. The
> fact is I don't put much effort in on here to be honest, because I
> know how these topics usually go. In real life, in my university work,
> I can argue points well and rarely drop below a first grade in any
> argued piece of work, maybe I could post it here if you're interested
> ? I've argued against dependency theory as a Third World concept, on
> Nationalism and it's course, Urban development and capitalism,
> Colonialism in the 18th century, a whole range of topics. Right now
> I'm researching a dissertation about the virtual worlds contained
> within games and the representations contained in them, including the
> works of Baudrillard, Heidegger, even old Plato and scores more
> sources. Half of the problem is the best references for arguments are
> not on the internet, but in texts, and it's rather hard to use them in
> arguments on here as many books I have I seriously doubt others have
> access to or would want to buy. I'm not being snobby, just I doubt
> many of you have even heard of Fighting For The Future or others...
None of which explains why, when trying to argue your point, you repeat yourself over and over and over. Your range of intellectual studies is impressive, but this is a webboard and anything posted here is judged on what is provided here. Not on whatever self-proclaimed academic brilliance the poster is responsible for at uni. If you want to be taken seriously (and despite your protestations, you clearly do), either put up or shut up.
>
> Wel you commented on my own, by your rating, low quality supposed
> insult, double standards, non ?
Not really; I went further than that, but you clipped that. Must have went against what you were saying, eh Bell?
>
> Actually a fair few people have said that of our and Goatboy's
> continuing spat, IB for one...
IB? Right...so him and? Cos, y'know, I've seen IB call black white when he's in the mood to be awkward.
Light wrote:
> That's a good point actually Blank...I still owe you a response on the
> Prostitution thread.
Blimey that's going back a while, I'm not sure I can even remember what I said in the first place!
> That's a good point actually Blank...I still owe you a response on the
> Prostitution thread.
Blimey that's going back a while, I'm not sure I can even remember what I said in the first place!
Light wrote:
> But you never explain why you believe it Bell. Don't you get it? Don't
> you get that THAT is why I rip into you? You can't actually explain
> your beliefs cos you don't even know yourself why you believe them.
> All you can offer are unimaginative phrases that you imagine are
> insulting, coupled with repeatedly stating your point over again, and
> when asked to explain it, posting the first link you found on Google.
> You're not much more than a troll Bell, and the annoying thing is I
> suspect you could be rather bright if you'd lose the obsessional
> "I must not be proved wrong" behaviour. Coupled with your
> bi-monthly "I'm leaving, never to return" rants, it doesn't
> exactly encourage people to take you seriously. That's not just on the
> board, that's an honest to god piece of advice based on my experience
> of life. Do with it as you will.
>
Okay, you post what you reckon I believe and I'll tell you why. The fact is I don't put much effort in on here to be honest, because I know how these topics usually go. In real life, in my university work, I can argue points well and rarely drop below a first grade in any argued piece of work, maybe I could post it here if you're interested ? I've argued against dependency theory as a Third World concept, on Nationalism and it's course, Urban development and capitalism, Colonialism in the 18th century, a whole range of topics. Right now I'm researching a dissertation about the virtual worlds contained within games and the representations contained in them, including the works of Baudrillard, Heidegger, even old Plato and scores more sources. Half of the problem is the best references for arguments are not on the internet, but in texts, and it's rather hard to use them in arguments on here as many books I have I seriously doubt others have access to or would want to buy. I'm not being snobby, just I doubt many of you have even heard of Fighting For The Future or others...
> Aw, it was so pathetic that you felt the need to comment on it. As for
> it being "sad Peter Kay"...well, I wish I was sad enough to
> have my own internationally acclaimed TV series, career, etc.
Wel you commented on my own, by your rating, low quality supposed insult, double standards, non ?
> Oh, and so you're speaking on behalf of everyone eh Bell? I must have
> missed the post where everyone on the board said "Yeah, we agree
> with you Bell, they're total fools"...
Actually a fair few people have said that of our and Goatboy's continuing spat, IB for one...
> But you never explain why you believe it Bell. Don't you get it? Don't
> you get that THAT is why I rip into you? You can't actually explain
> your beliefs cos you don't even know yourself why you believe them.
> All you can offer are unimaginative phrases that you imagine are
> insulting, coupled with repeatedly stating your point over again, and
> when asked to explain it, posting the first link you found on Google.
> You're not much more than a troll Bell, and the annoying thing is I
> suspect you could be rather bright if you'd lose the obsessional
> "I must not be proved wrong" behaviour. Coupled with your
> bi-monthly "I'm leaving, never to return" rants, it doesn't
> exactly encourage people to take you seriously. That's not just on the
> board, that's an honest to god piece of advice based on my experience
> of life. Do with it as you will.
>
Okay, you post what you reckon I believe and I'll tell you why. The fact is I don't put much effort in on here to be honest, because I know how these topics usually go. In real life, in my university work, I can argue points well and rarely drop below a first grade in any argued piece of work, maybe I could post it here if you're interested ? I've argued against dependency theory as a Third World concept, on Nationalism and it's course, Urban development and capitalism, Colonialism in the 18th century, a whole range of topics. Right now I'm researching a dissertation about the virtual worlds contained within games and the representations contained in them, including the works of Baudrillard, Heidegger, even old Plato and scores more sources. Half of the problem is the best references for arguments are not on the internet, but in texts, and it's rather hard to use them in arguments on here as many books I have I seriously doubt others have access to or would want to buy. I'm not being snobby, just I doubt many of you have even heard of Fighting For The Future or others...
> Aw, it was so pathetic that you felt the need to comment on it. As for
> it being "sad Peter Kay"...well, I wish I was sad enough to
> have my own internationally acclaimed TV series, career, etc.
Wel you commented on my own, by your rating, low quality supposed insult, double standards, non ?
> Oh, and so you're speaking on behalf of everyone eh Bell? I must have
> missed the post where everyone on the board said "Yeah, we agree
> with you Bell, they're total fools"...
Actually a fair few people have said that of our and Goatboy's continuing spat, IB for one...
Blank wrote:
That's a good point actually Blank...I still owe you a response on the Prostitution thread.
That's a good point actually Blank...I still owe you a response on the Prostitution thread.
Practical Magic wrote:
> Because I believe what I believe, and don't need anyone else to butt
> in...
But you never explain why you believe it Bell. Don't you get it? Don't you get that THAT is why I rip into you? You can't actually explain your beliefs cos you don't even know yourself why you believe them. All you can offer are unimaginative phrases that you imagine are insulting, coupled with repeatedly stating your point over again, and when asked to explain it, posting the first link you found on Google. You're not much more than a troll Bell, and the annoying thing is I suspect you could be rather bright if you'd lose the obsessional "I must not be proved wrong" behaviour. Coupled with your bi-monthly "I'm leaving, never to return" rants, it doesn't exactly encourage people to take you seriously. That's not just on the board, that's an honest to god piece of advice based on my experience of life. Do with it as you will.
>
> And, focusing on Light's disappointment about the quality of abuse
> hurled at him being rather low, well it's not really worth the effort.
> And your own examples certainly aren't witty one bit, remind me of
> rather sad Peter Kay style humour and that in (whatever idiot show he
> had, with the club type thing in it) ie pathetic. In 6 years or
> internet use you cna be assured that I have seen people use just about
> everything possible so don't believe yourself to be original.
Aw, it was so pathetic that you felt the need to comment on it. As for it being "sad Peter Kay"...well, I wish I was sad enough to have my own internationally acclaimed TV series, career, etc.
Well my dear boy, if that was pathetic, what was "At least Goatboy has his apprentice back"? Woody Allen give you that one, did he? If you've seen "just about everything" (and you haven't, but thanks for demonstrating how incredibly arrogant and conceited you are. Again), how come you've never posted a decent insult in your life?
Oh, and so you're speaking on behalf of everyone eh Bell? I must have missed the post where everyone on the board said "Yeah, we agree with you Bell, they're total fools"...
> Because I believe what I believe, and don't need anyone else to butt
> in...
But you never explain why you believe it Bell. Don't you get it? Don't you get that THAT is why I rip into you? You can't actually explain your beliefs cos you don't even know yourself why you believe them. All you can offer are unimaginative phrases that you imagine are insulting, coupled with repeatedly stating your point over again, and when asked to explain it, posting the first link you found on Google. You're not much more than a troll Bell, and the annoying thing is I suspect you could be rather bright if you'd lose the obsessional "I must not be proved wrong" behaviour. Coupled with your bi-monthly "I'm leaving, never to return" rants, it doesn't exactly encourage people to take you seriously. That's not just on the board, that's an honest to god piece of advice based on my experience of life. Do with it as you will.
>
> And, focusing on Light's disappointment about the quality of abuse
> hurled at him being rather low, well it's not really worth the effort.
> And your own examples certainly aren't witty one bit, remind me of
> rather sad Peter Kay style humour and that in (whatever idiot show he
> had, with the club type thing in it) ie pathetic. In 6 years or
> internet use you cna be assured that I have seen people use just about
> everything possible so don't believe yourself to be original.
Aw, it was so pathetic that you felt the need to comment on it. As for it being "sad Peter Kay"...well, I wish I was sad enough to have my own internationally acclaimed TV series, career, etc.
Well my dear boy, if that was pathetic, what was "At least Goatboy has his apprentice back"? Woody Allen give you that one, did he? If you've seen "just about everything" (and you haven't, but thanks for demonstrating how incredibly arrogant and conceited you are. Again), how come you've never posted a decent insult in your life?
Oh, and so you're speaking on behalf of everyone eh Bell? I must have missed the post where everyone on the board said "Yeah, we agree with you Bell, they're total fools"...
Your basic misunderstanding is that any person who happens to agree with another is somehow a sidekick or apprentice. It's possible to share the same view as someone else without taking that view simply because they have it. Yes, I agree with Goatboy on some issues. I also disagree with him on some. Same applies for Light. I've even agreed with you on some occasions - am I your apprentice as well?
It's fine by me if you want to call me an apprentice of Goatboy/Light/whoever, but I don't agree with them just for the sake of it. Don't you think it's possible that I might actually share the same view?
It's fine by me if you want to call me an apprentice of Goatboy/Light/whoever, but I don't agree with them just for the sake of it. Don't you think it's possible that I might actually share the same view?
Blank wrote:
> The real question is: why don't YOU have an apprentice?
Because I believe what I believe, and don't need anyone else to butt in...
Maybe the real question is why YOU feel the need to join in many topics agreeing with Goatboy when you often have little clue of the topic other than what he has posted. By all means join in, but be more original than "yeah, what he said" etc
And, focusing on Light's disappointment about the quality of abuse hurled at him being rather low, well it's not really worth the effort. And your own examples certainly aren't witty one bit, remind me of rather sad Peter Kay style humour and that in (whatever idiot show he had, with the club type thing in it) ie pathetic. In 6 years or internet use you cna be assured that I have seen people use just about everything possible so don't believe yourself to be original.
Besides anyone's insulting is a pale imitation of the insulting greatness that was IB... a master insulter, he was.
Anyway, Light once again feels the need to post nothing on topic - neither is this post but I am replying to him and Blank - , Blank once again chimes in, and 99.9% of forum users silently think "sad prats" for the umpteenth time today.
> The real question is: why don't YOU have an apprentice?
Because I believe what I believe, and don't need anyone else to butt in...
Maybe the real question is why YOU feel the need to join in many topics agreeing with Goatboy when you often have little clue of the topic other than what he has posted. By all means join in, but be more original than "yeah, what he said" etc
And, focusing on Light's disappointment about the quality of abuse hurled at him being rather low, well it's not really worth the effort. And your own examples certainly aren't witty one bit, remind me of rather sad Peter Kay style humour and that in (whatever idiot show he had, with the club type thing in it) ie pathetic. In 6 years or internet use you cna be assured that I have seen people use just about everything possible so don't believe yourself to be original.
Besides anyone's insulting is a pale imitation of the insulting greatness that was IB... a master insulter, he was.
Anyway, Light once again feels the need to post nothing on topic - neither is this post but I am replying to him and Blank - , Blank once again chimes in, and 99.9% of forum users silently think "sad prats" for the umpteenth time today.
Practical Magic wrote:
~sigh~ You may want to read the response to the thread about racism before gloating, my dear little boy.
Then we could perhaps take into account the threads I've started, and posts I've made (y'know, where I try to provoke thought) and then compare them to the ones you make (where you invariably whine about how it's not fair that you're getting picked on, or where you cry and stamp your feet and say you're never returning, before skulking back a few weeks later).
Once we've done all that, we'll start to think about what has been undermined, eh Bell? *L* Apprentice...man, at least make your insults insulting. I mean, you could have called me the last smearings of smeg from the foreskin of a syphillitic old tramp. Or you could have called into question my parentage, perhaps implying that my mother charged my father upwards of £4 for my conception, and even then I was supposed to only be a hand job but she was feeling generous. You could even have accused me, on record, of having carnal knowledge of an underaged goat's anus. Yet you didn't.
Probably cos you're not witty enough.
~sigh~ You may want to read the response to the thread about racism before gloating, my dear little boy.
Then we could perhaps take into account the threads I've started, and posts I've made (y'know, where I try to provoke thought) and then compare them to the ones you make (where you invariably whine about how it's not fair that you're getting picked on, or where you cry and stamp your feet and say you're never returning, before skulking back a few weeks later).
Once we've done all that, we'll start to think about what has been undermined, eh Bell? *L* Apprentice...man, at least make your insults insulting. I mean, you could have called me the last smearings of smeg from the foreskin of a syphillitic old tramp. Or you could have called into question my parentage, perhaps implying that my mother charged my father upwards of £4 for my conception, and even then I was supposed to only be a hand job but she was feeling generous. You could even have accused me, on record, of having carnal knowledge of an underaged goat's anus. Yet you didn't.
Probably cos you're not witty enough.
The real question is: why don't YOU have an apprentice?
Page: