Last I checked, the second word of your second line was "you". So that implies that it is the same person you are talking to as you originally were. Which was me, unless that bolded part was a load of crap...
what is the plural of "you"? yeh. that's right.
So from the second of these two quotes, you are changing the subject so it isn't aimed at me, as that is what the first line was about was it not? And the first of those two quotes, you say it was partly aimed at me. I don't think from what I have read others mentioned sitting, and I didn't mention co-playing in relation to them. So yeah, the sitting part couldn't have been aimed at anybody other than me? So really, it is a continuation of your first line, meaning that the only way the next part cannot be in any way connected is by creating a new paragraph, as your new lines stay on the same topic
indeed you were the only one suggesting a sitter. but the other ones were also questioning the co-playing
i was both explaining why a sitter would not work and why the co-playing would work. because my third paragraph was a conclusion, one that had my first paragraph as an argument.
The fact that you are continuing to argue that it wasn't mainly aimed at me, and yet I never said it was only aimed at me, though I could quite easily as you quoted me in the first post of this discussion, and then become more of an idiot by saying the post wasn't directed strictly at me.
true. you never said it was. but you took it as if it was. how do i know? simple. by your reply.
Firstly, I have yet to pick on one of that account's members. I am friends with one of the account owners - ask Will on skype perhaps?
Secondly, don't comment on people's personal life if you don't know them. For example, I'm a 17yo living on benefits, in education at the moment, in a flat by myself. So yeah - I am REALLY living off my parent's money. Quit with the real life comments and find a single bit of what you said which isn't junk.
Your conclusion (and entire post) is pretty much bullshit
your reply was an explanation of how that very thing you quoted is not true in your case. thus you took it as aimed at you, otherwise why would you defend yourself against it?
see all this argument is your failure to understand basic English, it's really quite stupid and i'm sorry i got myself involved into such childish talks, i really wish you stopped here as you can see i already stopped flaming you and am now just trying to explain to you, hopefully so that you understand how helplessly wrong you were. and what do you do?
Dude you are just talking crap again
and then become more of an idiot
oh one more thing
and yet I never said it was only aimed at me
You quoted me. Therefore if you weren't aiming it at me you shouldn't have quoted me.
let's see what other insults you can come up with when it's obvious your logic isn't getting you anywhere :icon_rolleyes:
