* originally wrote earlier today, but had connectivity issues Hi Ann,
Thank you for your concern about my work habits. In fact it was a fairly busy day, as are most days, and that is why I usually refrain from delving into FFL. But as an adult, and a business owner, I do allow myself some flexibility. In fact I have an early app't today, and so am rushing right now. And mercifully, this whole topic may have a chance to disappear for a little while, unless someone brings it up again in a little while. (that's good for a laugh) But dear Ann, since we are being direct here, I'll make some of my own observations. I recall early on how warmly you initially welcomed your friend Lord Knows, only to turn on him in a nasty way when he didn't adhere to your approved agenda on how we must now view RWC. Even to the point of outing his first name. That was pretty low IMO. And I must say, that I can't help but feel that Barry has scored a direct hit when he states that you (and others) listen only to RWC's words and ignore the intent and actions behind those works. RWC says "I'm Reformed", and AWB says, PTL, when the rest of the world says, "not so fast girlie" The accusation of my giving favored posters a pass? Lookie in the mirror on that one Ann. That's an easy one. And perhaps finally, (and because I am out of time), you might want take a look at some of the comments directed your way as to whether you really have moved past those three and a half years of 8-10 hours of day of your time with Robin. I can't help but feel that you might be having trouble seeing things objectively even now. Oh, and kudos to taxi's points about how logic can take some funny turns depending on how it applied and what is filtered through it. On the other hand Annie, you've been posting some funny stuff, and I certainly appreciate that. That's 50 4 me. (texting habit there) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ann" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray27" steve.sundur@ wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > snip > > > > > Hmm, now I'm beginning to see what's behind this. You and > > > Steve don't want to risk the attempt, because if you tried > > > and couldn't see what DrD describes, you'd be hesitant to > > > report your failure lest it appear that it was due to your > > > lack of comprehension, rather than DrD's analysis being > > > faulty. > > > > snip > > > > Judy, you are a genius. Maybe after this brilliant deduction you can > > work on a solution for the common cold. > > > > At the risk of Share proclaiming I have de-balled you Steve, I must say that you must have had a very slow day at work. Unfortunately, we at FFL have been the recipients of this unfortuitous downturn in business because it has obviously given you scads of downtime to post here. I can't say that your posts today have shown you in the best lights. In fact, at least two others have let it all hang out and it wasn't pretty. If I am being too ambiguous I would be happy to clarify. > > You know, it is interesting how you seem to taunt and thumb your nose with abandon at others here as if you expected some of the audience here to allow you membership into some sort of club as a result of your shenanigans. I can tell you one thing: I wouldn't want to be a member of any club those kinds of people frequent. You seem to be trying just a tad too hard here and it makes you look, well, pathetic. I know you are close to posting out so, Share, take it away. >
