you are a pompous ass! A lot of your "students" must use your "lectures" to catch up with lost sleep.

G=G+1

Di (amina046) said:

you are a pompous ass! A lot of your "students" must use your "lectures" to catch up with lost sleep.

Nobody who does things for and with others would come out and attack the likes of RGoss.

I have no clue what you were telling me.

BerrySteph said:

You wanted to know (in relation to an article that didn't mention "France" or "French") why the letter was in French.

No, I didn't.

I read the article, discovered that the rules of the modern day Olympics originated in France, then mused aloud "I wondered why everything was repeated in French..."

Which is what they do at the Olympic Games, every time they say something.

G=G+1

Ignoring a carefully laid out response for lack of any ability to answer is cowardice.

Jenifer (Zarknorph) said:

I read the article, discovered that the rules of the modern day Olympics originated in France, then mused aloud "I wondered why everything was repeated in French..." Which is what they do at the Olympic Games, every time they say something.

What you said was a question - one to which you knew the answer.

Which, if you notice, is what I said. the wording didn't require an answer from us, it did imply there would be answer from you.

Thankyou for providing it.

Good choice of words, "cowardice" considering that your "carefully laid out resonse" ignores the fact that you are ignoring the fact that each of your points has already been debunked.

G=G+1

Jenifer (Zarknorph) said:

Ignoring a carefully laid out response for lack of any ability to answer is cowardice.

There is a party that is doing this very brazenly in here. Gets angrier and angrier.

But its not RGoss doing it. His responses to things may be idiosyncratic but they're good.

G=G+1

I will not debate a non-existent argument.  I will not be led astray from the initial point.  This is a common tactic used by those who know they are losing an argument, but cannot accept that they may be wrong.

"I wonder why he will not answer the one question I asked."

That is debatable whether it is a question or not.  For it is an observation of my state of mind, rather than a simple "Will you answer the question, please?"

"I wondered why he never answered my question".

The way I read it, the past tense completely turns the original question (or statement) into an observation.  I am not asking anyone why they speak French at the Olympics, I am announcing that I was wondering about it.

Do you agree with that grammatical analysis, or do you disagree?  If you disagree, please explain. 

But - to be clear - the ONLY sentence I want explained is this one:

"I wondered why he never answered my question".

This is the conversation I have been trying to have with you.

You refuse to even acknowledge it, then insult me for ignoring your attempts to change the subject.

Please understand that a reply of G=G+1 will be considered an immediate admittance of defeat.