Quote:
Originally Posted by esquire
epacy, do you have an attitude problem that you'd like to advertise for us? or is it just that you can't handle when your OPINION isn't acknowledged as fact? maybe you should re-familiarize yourself with the general purpose of these forums: to engage in discussion, not to proselytize.
on the subject of definitions though, maybe you need to re-familiarize yourself with the definition of "overstating" given that my last post was a word for word cut and paste of webster dictionary's primary definition of substantial, with no embellishments.
if you have any more childish quips you'd like to offer, feel free to to bombard me in private messages rather than post your banal off-topic rants in a public forum.
|
So, you would call your antics "engaging in discussion"?
Again, you are not following. I wasn't referring to your definition as "overstating". It was your comment I was referring to.
Wouldn't your message be deemed a "childish quip" and "off-topic"?
My post about substantial performance was off-topic? What thread are you reading??
Please don't act like you are taking the high-road. You are the one who turned nasty.
What's next?