Re: Kelvin Shoddy & his knowledge of Sydney
Posted: Thu Jan 12, 2012 12:34 pm
Epic fail if you ask me.
www.talkingfooty.com
https://www.talkingfooty.com/forums/
I'd suggest thats your opinion .... I disagree & believe thats all the proof I needXman wrote:Ok, so far you have dippers comments as proof. Dermott never said or inferred a tsunami.Raiderdave wrote:yep ... thats what one does in a forumXman wrote:All you've proved Dave is that you can imbellish dermotss statement. He nev said they'd take over like a tsunami! He said they would have an impact significant enough for the NRl to take notice.
Post dippers comments again please.
Any others?
So far your statement is looking very very thin!
take it one step further to encourage debate ....
& no
I won't post it again ... I've done that once ... you find it
K
I'd suggest you've failed unless you find others.
Your original statement said that AFL fans were "jumping out of the woodwork" to say how the GwS would be a tsunami. So far you've shown two examples, one of which was clearly not talking tsunamis. In my book that ain't even close to fans jumping out of the woodwork.Raiderdave wrote:I'd suggest thats your opinion .... I disagree & believe thats all the proof I needXman wrote:Ok, so far you have dippers comments as proof. Dermott never said or inferred a tsunami.Raiderdave wrote:yep ... thats what one does in a forum
take it one step further to encourage debate ....
& no
I won't post it again ... I've done that once ... you find it
K
I'd suggest you've failed unless you find others.
yep ... 2 examples of the many out there .. is enough in MY opinion.Xman wrote:Your original statement said that AFL fans were "jumping out of the woodwork" to say how the GwS would be a tsunami. So far you've shown two examples, one of which was clearly not talking tsunamis. In my book that ain't even close to fans jumping out of the woodwork.Raiderdave wrote:I'd suggest thats your opinion .... I disagree & believe thats all the proof I needXman wrote:Ok, so far you have dippers comments as proof. Dermott never said or inferred a tsunami.
I'd suggest you've failed unless you find others.
Any other sources?
So coming out of the woodwork means 2 does it? One wasn't saying tsunamis either.King-Eliagh wrote:Topper, the little deaf/blind outcast of the fightclub
I think Raider provides decent evidence here Xman. You object but in a petty manner really.
Well that's your opinion. Good for you.Raiderdave wrote:yep ... 2 examples of the many out there .. is enough in MY opinion.Xman wrote:Your original statement said that AFL fans were "jumping out of the woodwork" to say how the GwS would be a tsunami. So far you've shown two examples, one of which was clearly not talking tsunamis. In my book that ain't even close to fans jumping out of the woodwork.Raiderdave wrote:I'd suggest thats your opinion .... I disagree & believe thats all the proof I need
Any other sources?
don't care what your opinion is .
look out EKing-Eliagh wrote:Topper, the little deaf/blind outcast of the fightclub
I think Raider provides decent evidence here Xman. You object but in a petty manner really.
I think I may be able to source something that contradicts that definition, Xman.Xman wrote:So coming out of the woodwork means 2 does it? One wasn't saying tsunamis either.King-Eliagh wrote:Topper, the little deaf/blind outcast of the fightclub
I think Raider provides decent evidence here Xman. You object but in a petty manner really.
Ok, mental note. Coming out of the woodwork means one person.
You still don't get this whole "I think" and proof part do you?Raiderdave wrote:look out EKing-Eliagh wrote:Topper, the little deaf/blind outcast of the fightclub
I think Raider provides decent evidence here Xman. You object but in a petty manner really.
you need to provide evidence of this![]()
![]()
Xman wrote:You still don't get this whole "I think" and proof part do you?Raiderdave wrote:look out EKing-Eliagh wrote:Topper, the little deaf/blind outcast of the fightclub
I think Raider provides decent evidence here Xman. You object but in a petty manner really.
you need to provide evidence of this![]()
![]()
Good, youre finally getting it! =D>Raiderdave wrote:Xman wrote:You still don't get this whole "I think" and proof part do you?Raiderdave wrote:look out E
you need to provide evidence of this![]()
![]()
I do ...
I think is just fine for fight club.
NSWAFL wrote:I think it's not fine for the fight club. I think it's fine for a trolling farm.