So long and thanks for all the fish recipes

HariboJunkie

poet123 wrote: »

I assume you are too, as you thanked posts which stated this should be referred to DT or the Arms, and the one by EL which questioned why it should.;) where is the confused smiley when you need it?

For clarity, why would we not do as EL has indicated is the right course of action? or do you disagree with her?

Sorry Poet. It's good to know you are checking who I thank, cos I really can't remember:rotfl:. Tell me the posts and I'll tell you why I thanked them. Really. I will ignore all the better things I have to do.
For clarity, although I must say I struggle to find it in your posts, I think Edinburghlass is correct in stating that this discussion on forum policy and whether the thread should be moved to DT, should be on the FB board but without the namecalling and personal references (as per site rules).

I'm actually really dizzy from all this spinning round in circles. _pale_

jackieglasgow

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Oops that looks really inappropriate, I was laughing at that Jinky!

poet123

Feel free.....and for info ( not yours obviously:p) DT and the Arms are usually places of civil and rational debate, not blinkered cronyism, as has been implied. They do have their moments however:rotfl:

candygirl

jackieglasgow wrote: »

Candygirl, what have I told you about letting your private life spill over into OS? :eek:Threesomes are only OldStyle for you, not everyone else! Stop dragging down the tone of the thread! :rotfl:

lol not only are they OS they are frugal for us meerkats:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:simples;)

zarazara

((((((((((HUGS)))))))))))) I have only just clicked onto this board as I love the recipes and things and am very saddened to read that somehow things have turned nasty. What a great shame.

Bitsy_Beans

poet123 wrote: »

Feel free.....and for info ( not yours obviously:p) DT and the Arms are usually places of civil and rational debate, not blinkered cronyism, as has been implied. They do have their moments however:rotfl:

Just as long as you don't mention you are claiming any benefits

Ooh am watching Men Who Stare at Goats - George Clooney or Ewen MacGregor - which would you choose???

jinky67

LilacLouisa wrote: »

Hmmm, am thinking it will take me a little while to reach such a volume, will have to work my way up to those sort of heights. perhaps by the time I find the forum I may have achieved it. ;-)

Oh No just jump right in, they love that:D

poet123 wrote: »

Feel free.....and for info ( not yours obviously:p) DT and the Arms are usually places of civil and rational debate, not blinkered cronyism, as has been implied. They do have their moments however:rotfl:

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

you are having a laugh now:D

poet123

HariboJunkie wrote: »

Sorry Poet. It's good to know you are checking who I thank, cos I really can't remember:rotfl:. Tell me the posts and I'll tell you why I thanked them. Really. I will ignore all the better things I have to do.
For clarity, although I must say I struggle to find it in your posts, I think Edinburghlass is correct in stating that this discussion on forum policy and whether the thread should be moved to DT, should be on the FB thread but without the namecalling and personal references (as per site rules).

I'm actually really dizzy from all this spinning round in circles. _pale_

Why would I not check you are consistent? it seems to me to be important that you are not merely thanking the person, but the content, however, if you do not agree that is up to you.

Ah clarity, we all seek that, but as above, it is not always obvious, sometimes however it is blindingly obvious.

So, are you of the opinion this thread should remain here despite it not being moneysaving or OS? or moved elsewhere in the interests of open debate?

poet123

Bitsy_Beans wrote: »

Just as long as you don't mention you are claiming any benefits

Ooh am watching Men Who Stare at Goats - George Clooney or Ewen MacGregor - which would you choose???

Ewan for me please!:D

HariboJunkie

poet123 wrote: »

Why would I not check you are consistent? it seems to me to be important that you are not merely thanking the person, but the content, however, if you do not agree that is up to you.

Ah clarity, we all seek that, but as above, it is not always obvious, sometimes however it is blindingly obvious.

So, are you of the opinion this thread should remain here despite it not being moneysaving or OS? or moved elsewhere in the interests of open debate?

Oooh mutiple choice. :j:j:j

That's easy. The answer is A) Miss.