I can wholeheartedly agree on the Willo paragraph :-)

Perhaps you should consider that the seriousness with which NG is taken depends on how aligned or opposed to his underpinning viewpoint the reader is, which is the actual point he made that I picked you up on.

As all the Fund Manager adverts say, "Past performance is no guarantee of future returns" ;-)

Edited by Mr_Gristle (30 Sep 2016 11.00am)

Expand on your classic boy who cried wolf please. I'm not sure you are using the correct analogy (that's using something similar to highlight what it is your getting at if it's too complicated a word.)

BTW FYI: Ad Hominem
adjective
1. appealing to one's prejudices, emotions, or special interests rather than to one's intellect or reason.
2. attacking an opponent's character rather than answering his argument.

Another classic tactic by you Gusset.... undermining.

You KNOW that I am using the right analogy.... as in your repeated actions have resulted in people not believing you.

And as for using adjectives like Ad Hominem - it's your raison d'etre to be pretentious....

What things don't they believe? That many people favour renationalisation? That there is a widening gap between the haves and have not? That there was no plan for Brexit? That you comment on things you haven't read? I could go on.

Way to avoid the questions.

Not really.

I'm off out now to campaign for education with fellow Labour party and NUT members. Have a good morning.

Edited by nickgusset (01 Oct 2016 10.08am)