REGISTER NOW!! Why? Because you can't do much without having been registered!

At the moment you have limited access to view all discussions - and most importantly, you haven't joined our community. What are you waiting for? Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join Join Talking Horses here!

Reply to thread

Message

Do you really want to keep running with this? Clearly you do; your last half-dozen posts -- in each one you have been referencing it. It's becoming tiresome.
I've tried to avoid being baited, but in your most recent post above you've succeeded in finally goading me into a reply, so here's the response in plain talking that you seem to be so desperately seeking:
Nobody has any objection to the re-publishing of third party opinion; it's when the poster manages to omit any acknowledgement of the original source of information that grates. To acknowledge an original author is accepted internet etiquette, and you're long enough in the tooth to know that.
On top of that, when Cruz won the caucus, you were very quick to post up a smug remark hinting that you yourself had called the result correctly when in fact it was Malinsky that had actually done so. Gloating is never an attractive trait, even less so when the gloating is built on plagiarism.

No more about it from my end; you're more than welcome to re-state your position but I won't be drawn further.

<blockquote data-quote="icebreaker" data-source="post: 2523233" data-attributes="member: 65230">Do you really want to keep running with this? Clearly you do; your last half-dozen posts -- in each one you have been referencing it. It&#039;s becoming tiresome.I&#039;ve tried to avoid being baited, but in your most recent post above you&#039;ve succeeded in finally goading me into a reply, so here&#039;s the response in plain talking that you seem to be so desperately seeking:Nobody has any objection to the re-publishing of third party opinion; it&#039;s when the poster manages to omit any acknowledgement of the original source of information that grates. To acknowledge an original author is accepted internet etiquette, and you&#039;re long enough in the tooth to know that.On top of that, when Cruz won the caucus, you were very quick to post up a smug remark hinting that you yourself had called the result correctly when in fact it was Malinsky that had actually done so. Gloating is never an attractive trait, even less so when the gloating is built on plagiarism.No more about it from my end; you&#039;re more than welcome to re-state your position but I won&#039;t be drawn further.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="icebreaker, post: 2523233, member: 65230"] Do you really want to keep running with this? Clearly you do; your last half-dozen posts -- in each one you have been referencing it. It's becoming tiresome. I've tried to avoid being baited, but in your most recent post above you've succeeded in finally goading me into a reply, so here's the response in plain talking that you seem to be so desperately seeking: Nobody has any objection to the re-publishing of third party opinion; it's when the poster manages to omit any acknowledgement of the original source of information that grates. To acknowledge an original author is accepted internet etiquette, and you're long enough in the tooth to know that. On top of that, when Cruz won the caucus, you were very quick to post up a smug remark hinting that you yourself had called the result correctly when in fact it was Malinsky that had actually done so. Gloating is never an attractive trait, even less so when the gloating is built on plagiarism. No more about it from my end; you're more than welcome to re-state your position but I won't be drawn further. [/QUOTE]

Verification: 5 + 3 = ?