Tesco Shoplifting - need help.

Moglex

JReacher1 wrote: »

You have to understand the purpose of a full stop..... The two statements are unrelated as they are separated by one. "I'm with Jack Reacher on this" "No chance at all that the cctv is missing". You are attempting to start a straw man argument by inferring that the poster has posted "I'm with Jack Reacher on this no chance that the CCTV is missing". This is not what they posted (or indeed what I posted). Therefore you should really apologise to them (unless of course you are trolling in which case carry on )

Good grief, you could start an argument in an empty room!

It's hardly a big deal, and the least important part of the post.

I've removed that line just to keep you happy!

JReacher1

Moglex wrote: »

Good grief, you could start an argument in an empty room!

It's hardly a big deal, and the least important part of the post.

I've removed that line just to keep you happy!

Cheers

Although I would like to point out that it was you that decided to have an argument with the poster concerned

Everyone else on this thread is getting along swimmingly :T

Sheldon_Cooper

If you are going to try and teach people English, at least have the good sense to find out what you are talking about, first.

JReacher1 wrote: »

You have to understand the purpose of a full stop.....

The two statements are unrelated as they are separated by one.

"I'm with Jack Reacher on this"

"No chance at all that the cctv is missing".

You are attempting to start a straw man argument by inferring that the poster has posted

"I'm with Jack Reacher on this no chance that the CCTV is missing".

That's a run on sentence. It needs a full stop exactly were swingaloo put one. (He, unlike you, seems to understand punctuation.)


Not only is this post petty, pedantic and argumentative, it is fundamentally wrong.

If you make a statement of the form: "I agree with X", followed immediately by another statement of fact, it would be generally assumed by most people that the two sentences were related. The thing that breaks the association of statements and ideas is a PARAGRAPH, not a full stop.

JReacher1

Sheldon_Cooper wrote: »

If you are going to try and teach people English, at least have the good sense to find out what you are talking about, first.



That's a run on sentence. It needs a full stop exactly were swingaloo put one. (He, unlike you, seems to understand punctuation.)


Not only is this post petty, pedantic and argumentative, it is fundamentally wrong.

If you make a statement of the form: "I agree with X", followed immediately by another statement of fact, it would be generally assumed by most people that the two sentences were related. The thing that breaks the association of statements and ideas is a PARAGRAPH, not a full stop.

You're wrong.

However this is not at all relevant to the thread and the poster concerned has deleted the statement I disagreed with. So there is no longer a reason to continue this discussion.

Please try and keep all future posts on topic to the original thread.

Thanks

Moglex

JReacher1 wrote: »

You're wrong.

I see you are using one of your usual, schoolboy debating tactics: Telling someone who has carefully explained something that they are wrong, without any reasoning whatsoever, and then attempting to distract attention from your failure to defend your assertion by doing a bit of freelance modding.

No doubt you'll now carry on arguing about irrelevances until everyone gives up and lets you have the last word.

JReacher1

Moglex wrote: »

I see you are using one of your usual, schoolboy debating tactics: Telling someone who has carefully explained something that they are wrong, without any reasoning whatsoever, and then attempting to distract attention from your failure to defend your assertion by doing a bit of freelance modding.

No doubt you'll now carry on arguing about irrelevances until everyone gives up and lets you have the last word.

I've already explained to yourself my argument which you appear to have agreed with as you deleted the part I complained about.

There was no need to repeat it to someone else.

POPPYOSCAR

Do people really have nothing better to do than argue on here!

Azari

POPPYOSCAR wrote: »

Do people really have nothing better to do than argue on here!

In JackReacher's case, I think the answer is a resounding: NO!

I think he should be awarded the 2015 Goater shield for pointless, irrelevant posting.

JReacher1

POPPYOSCAR wrote: »

Do people really have nothing better to do than argue on here!

A healthy debate is always fun (as long as it doesn't cross the line into personal abuse).

It does get a bit tedious when people try and drag threads off topic to argue but you have to expect that behaviour on an Internet forum

Azari

JReacher1 wrote: »

A healthy debate is always fun (as long as it doesn't cross the line into personal abuse).

It does get a bit tedious when people try and drag threads off topic to argue but you have to expect that behaviour on an Internet forum

Looking at the above, moglex made two posts, both or which contained sensible, relevant, points, and it was you who started a chain of irrelevant posts with an ill advised English lesson which only demonstrated your own woeful lack of understanding of punctuation.