But you nit pick at the smallest things with me and run with it

You're current thing, is to question why I'm digging at the board, and you're using the fact I've said 2 names and the same thing in the space of a few days

But ultimately, you're onto me for criticising the board, and you don't like it, so you're going to run with it. Lets go back to the sunglasses thing, you were hoping to set up a new joke with that, because it was a ludicrous thing for me to notice apparently. Even though anybody in the public eye, whether in court, walking down the street with journos snapping away, will wear sunglasses to naturally create a virtual shield. It was only until I pointed out to you that Hazard and Oscar, in the same ground were using the same tactic, that you began to understand or realise my point

That's fine, BUT, for me to constantly have to thoroughly tell you in fine detail what I definitely mean, resembles a court room type scenario on here. Others might just see my point and be ok with it. But you (and some others), will create a joke out of an ordinary point

The sunglasses thing is related, because you're questioning my comments. I was very critical of the way they didn't support Roeder properly, because the funds weren't there. You can see this around that time, and on the day he was fired (14th Jan 2009). Like the sunglasses thing, you can create a joke for this if you like. Why the f**k do I remember the exact date, what a weirdo pants, lol, f**k me, he loves Roeder that much, lol. You'd get at least a month's worth out of it, with replies of "bestie" along the way

You know the above would happen, and you'd like it. Then I'd have to give you full explanation to how I know the date, because it's the same day as my best friends birthday (which is a really obvious landmark to remember after 20 years friendship). Then this detail would probably be ignored, and the joke would continue "he was probably having 'the time of his life in 2009 lol'

This is how it plays out, so no, I don't agree with you that I mistranslate normal posts as bullying. I translate someone who doesn't like me as playing out a specific courtroom style baiting game

But at least we've got the 14th Jan 2009 covered without a month of stupid posts. You can look back around then, and you'll see similar posts to the ones I've made recently. Which should prove to you that my view doesn't actually sway or change that much at all.

Now, the fact I have to heavilly go into detail with you, in order to request that you don't just sharply start on me over a very ordinary post at 11.01.37. The fact we have to get to this level, for me to explain myself to you, is the reason why I refer a fued with you that's gone on way too long since 2010, yes, makes me say that post last night

I said it because you attempt to take me down this road of incredible intensity and questioning, on a regular basis

You could just let it go and accept me on here, but no, you purposely chose an intense and very forward way of conducting yourself on here.

I normally ignore an awful lot of your taunts, but today, you started on me over very little. I'm glad we've got to the root of why you have, it's because of my post to small last night, and you don't like it

If you want it to change, stop hiding behind scc multiple times a day, and stop f**king bullying me. It's really simple

Posted By: pants, May 11, 14:08:53