Post one from this thread and we'll discuss it
Who Posted?
- Thread starter chrysostom
- Start date
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Yep, figured. You've no answer.
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Whats the matter SOD? Don't like the one where you've flat out lied about TH's credentials as a lawyer? Your sig doesn't just apply to how you speak in this thread so stop being so gutless and address it.
Where it comes to this thread then take your pick of any post where you've used gossipy little snipes. There's plenty of em'.
One artie.
Just one.
From this thread.
Post it up here and we'll discuss it.
Just one.
From this thread.
Post it up here and we'll discuss it.
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Address this SOD and stop being such a gutless wimp about it. Take responsibility for your own words and hypocrisy for once.
One artie.
Just one.
From this thread.
Post it up here and we'll discuss it.
Just one.
From this thread.
Post it up here and we'll discuss it.
He won't. The way he uses the Holy is nothing new. He's comfortable saying anything that suits him because the first complaint he made about me when I differed with his baiting tactics is the key to understanding him. He said I was playing a game. No reason to say it, except it was the thing at the heart of who he is here and what he does. It was what he understood, so he projected it.
Sod is here to amuse himself. He's said it. There's nothing more or less to it and him than that. Dishonesty doesn't trouble him. He doesn't care.
Just enjoy pointing out the hypocrisy that approach can't help but generate and never, under any circumstances, take him seriously. I did that once. No idea now why. Just new to the forum scene.
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
:thumb:
His reticence to address the post in regards to your being a lawyer underlines all your above.
Whats wrong with a lawyer wanting to be a writer instead, it worked well for John Grissam
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Does your sig only apply to this thread?
He's in a great position. He can and still does (or at least did a while back) practice when it suits him, take pro bono work and only field the sort of cases and clients he wants.
Well that's just an extremely stupid thing to say about the profession.
artie said:
I heard a lot of squawking earlier about how horrible Chrys and I have been in this thread
Now that I've offered to discuss any single post of mine from this thread, the squawking has stopped. :think:
Oh sure, you're still struggling with the concept of providing a single post of mine from this thread, putting it up there so we can discuss it, but we've come to expect nothing better from you.
But I have hope you'll figure it out eventually, bless your little heart.
Agreed ... how ridiculous to focus on this thread. You (just you) are horrible in all threads.
Better?
Actually when it comes to criminal law, i can understand the sentiment.
I used to want to be a lawyer when i was younger - but the more i knew about criminal law, i thought there is no way i could defend someone i knew or thought was guilty and no way i could prosecute someone i knew or thought was innocent and the grey areas of both would at some point force me to either quit or compromise my own morals, there would be no other way to do the job.
There's a reason lawyers have the reputation they have
even among law students :chuckle: