Tedious bickering
 

Davar is steaming drunk ATM

(IMHO)

David

No sir. I rarely drink. Thanks for nothing.

[QUOTE=davar55;245765]Yes, that might be a delightful result, but ewmayer at least thought
before he contributed his useful post.[/QUOTE]

Go and kill someone from the mad hatter's tea party
and make yourself useful.

There are enough lunatics ruling this asylum already.

God

I don't think it necessary to react to the
stupid chldiishness you repeatedly display.

See OP.

[QUOTE=davar55;245986]I don't think it necessary to react to the
stupid chldiishness you repeatedly display.

See OP.[/QUOTE]

I've given up responding to your posts as well.

This thread and all other threads in which davieddy has posted
should be reexamined by the moderators and/or supermoderator.

His submissions/postings are extremely suspect.

[QUOTE=davar55;246137]This thread and all other threads in which davieddy has posted
should be reexamined by the moderators and/or supermoderator.

His submissions/postings are extremely suspect.[/QUOTE]

Ignore list. Learn it. Love it.

[QUOTE=axn;246144]Ignore list. Learn it. Love it.[/QUOTE]

Totally disagree.

Moderator involvement and banning is suggested.

[QUOTE=davar55;246148]Totally disagree.

Moderator involvement and banning is suggested.[/QUOTE]

Don't knock it till you've tried it.

But, if moderator involvement is what you desire, each post has a report icon (to the left). Click it and provide an explanation. No need to meta-post on the thread itself.

[QUOTE=davar55;246148]Totally disagree.

Moderator involvement and banning is suggested.[/QUOTE]

If you go back to your post #20, then my intended constructive,
relevant albeit not heavyweight post #21, you might realize why
I am slightly astonished by your quite unnecessarily stroppy and
negative responses.

Bearing in mind the amount of (by and large) good-natured banter
we have exchanged recently, I have to say this reaction is
disappointing to put it mildly.

How could you interpret axn's post as anything other than a
diplomatic way of suggesting that the two of us give it
a rest for a bit?

David

[QUOTE=davieddy;246154]If you go back to your post #20, then my intended constructive,
relevant albeit not heavyweight post #21, you might realize why
I am slightly astonished by your quite unnecessarily stroppy and
negative responses.

Bearing in mind the amount of (by and large) good-natured banter
we have exchanged recently, I have to say this reaction is
disappointing to put it mildly.

How could you interpret axn's post as anything other than a
diplomatic way of suggesting that the two of us give it
a rest for a bit?
[/QUOTE]

Because of posts 22 and 23.