Posted by Duggy on 03/30/06 17:35

c64fan@hotmail.com wrote:

> Yes and it took several days for you to admit that

Mistake made on the 21st March, first admition of mistake 22nd.
Once again, you have completely misused the word several.
And yet you talk about comprehension and mathematical difficulties.

> and even STILL you
> blame your mistake on others as evidenced by the sentence:

My mistake. It's not without contributing factors, but it's nobody
else's fault.

Why are you refusing, over and over, to accept this?

> Sorry but there was nothing ambiguous about it when read in context.
> not only was 52 issues specified, but the following sentence expounded
> upon what was meant.

The following sentence, in the singular use of title, seemed to mean 4
or 5 series a month getting the 52 extra issues.

> But it did gel with the rest of the sentence and the one that followed
> it that expounded on the idea being reprented, which is why people even
> worked out the math for you and you still weren't getting it. and once
> you did get it you still continued to blame others for your mistake.

So you seem to want to keep pretending.

> well, good to know you realize how sad and pathetic you are.

Yup. Your turn, or aren't you ready yet?

> If that were true you wouldn't be stalking me across the net and
> continually replying to me about this same topic over and over and
> over. face it you crave my attention and I'm willing to take enough
> pity on you to give it.

It's up to you, you can either stop feeding the troll or you can admit
that I've admitting my mistake, despite your continued
misrepresentations of actual events.

> > Interestingly of the three of you who
> > originally told me that "52 isn't 40" until I worked out where the real
> > misunderstanding was, you're the only one still hanging on to the lie.
> 1) it's not a lie, it the truth no matter how much you wish to lie about.

Do you mean "it is the truth"?

I never thought that 52 wasn't 40. I questioned whether 52 extra
issues of an ongoing title was correct when making it a weekly would
only require forty.

Had I realised that the use of series meant titles not title, I would
not have thought it was a mistake.

At no point did I think that 52 was 40, please come to terms with that.

> 2) the only reason I'm "still hanging on to it" is because *YOU*
> stalked me to an unrelated newsgroup and claimed I lied,

You did.

thus I
> explained what the bee was in your bonnet. If you hadn't noticed, I
> haven't posted a thing about the 52 vs 40 in the original thread in
> days. If you hadn't of come stalking after my attention, this issue
> would have been dropped long ago.

With that lie still standing.

> ??? so much for your ficticious English degree, that made no sense.
> Fortunately, with a little bit of reading comprehension (a skill you
> have yet to learn) I can determine that what you were TRYING to say was
> "are you smarter than all three of us...".

Never made a mistake? No. You made one in this post.

My BA(Eng) is real, but let's just make that a mistaken belief of yours
rather than a lie, because you aren't to know.

> All three? I don't know
> about the other two (and normally I don't really care about who is
> smarter than whom), but judging on what I've seen you post so far, it
> certainly seems to me that I'm smarter than you.

Maybe in selophane-64 land.

> Perhaps in real life you are much smarter than your posts indicate,

But my degree is ficitious?

> BTW it's rather obvious that you are the one "too stubborn
> to admit you're wrong ot too stupid to know" hence your stalking me
> over an issue that otherwise would have stopped being an issue days
> ago.

I've admitted I'm wrong. Over and over. So, no, I'm not too stupid to
know. Yet you keep making the accusation.

But, yeah, I'm stubborn. If I've been lied about, I'm not going to let
the person run away with it still in the air.

===
= DUG.
===

[Back to original message]