Judy, I don't have what you call an insatiable urge to pander. But I often make conscious choices to say what I like about someone's posts. There's a big difference and it's one you imo cannot see because you are at the other end of the spectrum, tending to be hyper critical.
And in this particular case, Carol was asking Richard if he was being sarcastic or serious or what. So my comment was addressing that as well as telling Richard what I like about his posts. Why not? In fact, you yourself praised Carol in this thread. Was that also what you call pandering? On Sunday, February 16, 2014 1:54 PM, "authfri...@yahoo.com" <authfri...@yahoo.com> wrote: Sheesh, that had nothing to do with any "grudge." I was just poking fun at her insatiable urge to pander. That's not necessary either, certainly not with Richard. Nor was this post of yours, for that matter! Plus which, unless you're on dial-up and not broadband, I seriously doubt that data traffic gets slowed down by lots of posts. << See?, this is exactly the reason you are seen as a grudge holder here. Was there any need to make that post? Excessive posts clog up the bandwidth and slow down data traffic. >> ---authfriend <authfriend@...> wrote: Share to the defense! <guffaw> << Richard, I admit that your writing style delights me. Even when I don't agree with the content! Go figure! It's just that you almost always sound light hearted about all this stuff. And I thoroughly enjoy how you skip from one topic to the other. Those funny combo help me be more light hearted about it too. Anyway, thank you so much for making me smile and even laugh out loud a lot. >>
