What A Barbaric Sport...

[The Anonymous Bard]

And if you hadn't used abusive language, in your original post, it would have stayed that way, it's as simple as that.

 

You insulted people.

I criticised something somebody said using a word that you find unacceptable but I found appropriate.

 

There is a distinction that makes what you said personal abuse and what I said an impersonal criticism.

 

If aimed at me, I would not take "you're talking bollocks" personally as it is an attack on something I said, not the person I am.

 

Dismissing a whole group as " dumb, nose pierced, benefit drawing idiots..." is, however a insult that has no bearing in fact. Just an ill-informed personal snipe.

 

I have removed the word that has upset you so much (bless) and replaced it with "rubbish" as that is just as appropriate.

 

Now if you'd like to defend your original post, instead of throwing a hissy fit at one word, then I am happy to join in.

 

I thought you were stepping out... didn't last long did it!

 

No I completely disagree, In my mind I insulted a group of unidentifiable people of whom none have stepped forward to complain as belonging to such a group, if they do I will duly apolgise and feel happier for knowing that I may have been wrong.

 

You used what I and I am sure others would consider offensive terminology against an individual forum user which you have now removed and you appear to me to want to re-discuss the whole thing again whilst discarding your earlier comments?

 

What is this... a kind of "can I have a second chance?" re-edit?

 

My original post has been defended in my reply to wanted, earlier on you were stating that you had made the mistake of feeding the troll and now you're back again?

 

I'm quite happy with the way things sit.

[carlt]

What is this... a kind of "can I have a second chance?" re-edit?

No I was offering an "agree to differ" route back to amicably discussing your original point, rather than the abusive content of your op, but as you say...

I'm quite happy with the way things sit.

I guess you'll just continue with your pathetic trolling.

Edited February 28, 2012 by carlt

[The Anonymous Bard]

No I was offering an "agree to differ" route back to discussing your original point, rather than the abusive content of your op, but as you say...

 

I guess you'll just continue with your pathetic trolling.

 

Lol... nothing ever changes does it?

[carlt]

Lol... nothing ever changes does it?

Evidently not, in your case.

[The Anonymous Bard]

Evidently not, in your case.

 

Zzzzzzzzz... Zzzzzzzzz...

[Guest wanted]

I thought you were stepping out... didn't last long did it!

 

No I completely disagree, In my mind I insulted a group of unidentifiable people of whom none have stepped forward to complain as belonging to such a group, if they do I will duly apolgise and feel happier for knowing that I may have been wrong.

 

You used what I and I am sure others would consider offensive terminology against an individual forum user which you have now removed and you appear to me to want to re-discuss the whole thing again whilst discarding your earlier comments?

 

What is this... a kind of "can I have a second chance?" re-edit?

 

My original post has been defended in my reply to wanted, earlier on you were stating that you had made the mistake of feeding the troll and now you're back again?

 

I'm quite happy with the way things sit.

 

The thing is see, I am insulted by your last sentance in the OP. I have no problem with nose rings however don't have one. I have no problem with the unemployed however have never been. I have a major issue with all blood sports but don't fit into your ridiculous stereotype.

 

As far as using this nonsence to stir lively debate, I think you know how people would react and I am starting to think that it was your intention to troll.

 

I'll try and leave this here because I don't want to get drawn in.

[mark99]

Interesting comments re litter.

 

There is no one interest group that's dirtier than others - it seems to me that there is a constant % of the population that drops/leaves litter and the more footfall, the bigger the collection of litter. Anglers (I am a keen angler) are just as messy and dirty as everyone else.

 

I back onto a golf course...... I would have though golfers would enjoy their sport in a pritsine environment and indeed virtually every hole has a nice big litter bin and I see the golf management empying them most days - but if you go round the perimeter - it's full of litter stuffed into bushes. Defies logic - there are bins provided!

 

When I walk the dogs round, I take a carrier bag and clear up bits of the golfers course - but it keeps coming back - the favourite places are the copse or tunnels connecting one hole to another.

 

I used to have philosophy of "don't get annoyed by a piece of litter - think of how many pieces of litter have NOT been dropped by loads of people walking past the same place"..... but it's getting harder to think like that. I feel like an idiot sometimes clearing up other peoples shite.

 

Mark

[jelunga]

Or eaten them.....just to make sure they didn't spread of course!

 

taslim.

Taste great saute~d in a little gærlic butter

[Athy]

I have only just read this thread for the first time. reading the initial psst, I was surprised that the crawfish (crayfish? are they the same species?) were carefully moved. I assumed that the anglers would catch them and take them home for the pot. Is it illegal to catch them?

I also noted the comment that people took up fishing to relieve the boredom of being unemployed. Should this not have been the other way round?

[mark99]

I have only just read this thread for the first time. reading the initial psst, I was surprised that the crawfish (crayfish? are they the same species?) were carefully moved. I assumed that the anglers would catch them and take them home for the pot. Is it illegal to catch them?

 

 

 

Mark

 

 

I also noted the comment that people took up fishing to relieve the boredom of being unemployed. Should this not have been the other way round?

 

as in become unemployed to stop being bored by angling?

 

Native or white crayfish are a protected and endangered species. IIRC illegal to remove.

 

Amercian signal crayfish are regarded as a nuisance and they are slowly wiping out our native crayfish with their own diseases (crayfish plague). Illegal to put back.

 

Boaters are ideally placed to help reduce the signal crayfish population and get free food. Stab a small tin of cheap catfood place in a net and lower over the side. 1/2 hour later if there are signals about you will have loads of em. They are massive compared to the little white 'uns.

 

Mark

Edited April 16, 2012 by mark99

[The Anonymous Bard]

Well no reply so I guess I should settle for the peaceful way ahead and live and let live for another day... wouldn't want to get accused of trolling now.

Edited April 19, 2012 by The Anonymous Bard

[The Anonymous Bard]

See above.

Edited April 19, 2012 by The Anonymous Bard