Mrs Roops

I didn't "admonish" anyone for acrimonious content. I was defending the charge of being hypocritical. My mind has been clear from the outset. If people want to dish it out, they shouldn't howl like banshees when it comes back to them.

Well boo-hoo. This a big ask, but try and add some substance or rational argument rather than pull the first mindless insult you can think of

Jeez, life sucks being me. Really Wolfie, really? "....an...an...and I got five likes, so there!" I must apologise for the facetiousness - I put it down to several 5G masts triangulating on my brain after being jabbed with 0.3mL of Comirnaty mRNA vaccine late this morning. Moving on - It has always been understood that given the nature of the site there will be some inter-member needling. I actually cautioned you on waging a vendetta and in the situation you refer to I did not instigate or foment anything. A punter had indicated that I was in for a "char broiling" when I next logged in. I had three options; one, do nothing and take it like a punch bag. That would have emboldened other punters to try it on with the inevitable consequences that would ensue. Two, I could go full-on bitch mode and cooler people for Admin abuse and baiting which would have sanctimonious divas like you at the head of the queue wailing about abuse of power and pulling rank. I chose option three which was to confront the issue. As it turned out both of them gave a superb imitation of two wet and wilting blankets. The comment you quoted was my parting shot to them. Wolfie, its a given that you sometimes act the pompous sanctimonious pratt who see's himself as The Corner's self-appointed barrack-room lawyer but do the research prior to the next bout of self-righteous pontifications. I reiterate; no apology proffered as none is due.

So you keep on saying, again and again and again. Its as if you cant keep me out of your deranged mind...

Is your tone deafness accidental or deliberate or both?

This of course has nothing to do with someone you don't like not being severely punished enough... If you must conflate two entirely different threads then at least bother to read the relevant discourse and context. No apology proffered as none is needed. "Unfuckingbelievable" indeed

How so? You regaled us all with tales of lotus eating around the Balearics, The Aegean Sea and The Rhone. Unfortunately the IP data simply did not back this up. You repeatedly asserted you were sailing a 17 ton sailboat despite an injured shoulder - pre or post-op, it matters not. Now you employ the usual exposed fantasists cop-out "I was only joking" despite throwing a thromby when I initially called you out. To distract, you throw out past minor errors on my part which arguably are not only irrelevant but moot. All this was yesterday news, done and forgotten until your bruised ego inexplicably decided to rake over the coals.

Such is the parcity of your case you ain't got much to hang your coat on notwithstanding you are now dialling back with the the fantasy narrative. You had a a little foot-stomping session over the IP disclosure, remember? My "game" has been fine whereas your arse is with your shoulder - in the sling.

I never said that, as well you know. I will say you should pare down the Covid ambulance chasing as its making you look like a rabid nutter.

I did say "partly responsible". The rest of your nonsense is petulant schoolboy rhetoric.

I'd be surprised if you could successfully navigate a toy duck in your bathtub let alone sail and dock a 17 ton, 55' Beneteau given the chapter and verse you gave on your shoulder injury.

Some of you guys have short memories. After the first coronavirus wave swept around the world, many governments were castigated for the response and actions that were deemed as too little, too late. One two-time popular vote loser failed to get re-elected as leader of his country partly as a result of his inept leadership over the handling of the pandemic. Governments do not wish to repeat the same mistake. South Africa's response to B.1.1.529 is disappointing as the attitudes of Health Minister Joe Phaahla and SAMA's Dr Angelique Coetzee show that a mindset of "virus, what virus?" was partly responsible for that country becoming the world epicentre for HIV/Aids (20% of South Africans are HIV positive) and tuberculosis. Given past and present circumstances any country that fails to slap a travel ban on South Africa would be guilty of negligence bordering on criminality.

What ball? The way KB was describing it he saw a talking head tapping the side of his nose saying, "I know stuff. But it's secret. Trust me anyway". C'mon! FWIW, I thought Dr Carpenter was pretty impressive in providing in layman's terms the issues at play, but even he had some salient caveats.

Its convenient that "findings weren't being made public" rather like that other oft used tin-hatter cop-out "but you won't see that reported". That aside, the British Institution, which curated and promoted fine arts, was disbanded in the 1860's so what organisation are you on about or have you misquoted the telegenic Dr Malhotra, author of the "Pioppi Diet" which was awarded "one of the top five worst celeb diets to avoid in 2018" by the British Dietetic Association?

I spoke as I found - I always do on such matters. That my findings didn't pander to whatever fantasy narrative you have in gaslighting the puntership with is not my problem. No worries, why not seek out your latest BFF and have a reassuring hug and sympathetically pat each others' bottoms.

@DCI Gene CuntI've just removed a nom and one post penned by you. Cut down on the Smarties otherwise you'll be removed from the site.

What medicine? From you? Colour me incredulous but your CC status is that of a limp lettuce who when not seeking validation from strange bed-fellows, appears to have a friend/mate/relative in every what3words box.

More like hypocrisy. I first cottoned onto Two-jabs Google addiction when he posted a semi-measured treatise on Orwell and Huxley a few months back.

Right now that would be more believable than the tales of your last three boat cruises.

As usual you're clutching at straws which I put down to accumulated trace elements of tin in the brain and spending waay too much time scouring Google. The caveat I mentioned is within the report. As for Twitter, I read that the platform receives 6,000 tweets per second and vetting is largely done by machine so there are going to be anomalies. Fine art Renaissance pictures featuring an unclothed female breast have been "censored" by the Twitter logarithms though you'd be stomping your feet in a toddler-like rage at the thought of some pearl-clutching moral majority figure pressing the delete button. And no, I didn't look into the "specifically targeted removal of It" as I'm not insane.

I coolered a punter for a Rule 12 violation (now deleted) in the Open Corner. Now I must, must get some sleep!

Well, I'm off to bed. I must say after all this talk of violence and char broiling I was expecting a good scrap. Two against one was decent odds and a fair fight in my book but what I encountered was two simps hugging each other waving sodden white flags torn from their petticoats. Jeeze I miss the old days of Pisstazza and the other psychos.

Interestingly, the report after hitting the bioscience journals, was initially covered by the Reuters agency for dissemination to news providers which rather kills the notion of a biased MSM but that's just a little aside. As for the report itself, I can't fault the methodology but the sample are monitored heart patients so there could be other factors at play, a point conceded by the report's author who hedged his bets by saying "may account"

When I looked his morning the report was on Twitter feeds...more fake news about censorship from you, but thats' the norm I guess.

I'll send a tube of Savlon to both of you to share and apply. Obviously you're both smarting.