Before you go saying things about the English language and what is or isn't a word, dickie, why don't you consult the Oxford English Dictionary?

I have, but it's subscription service online so I won't post the link. I'm sure you already know that, right? Ha!

I am in "disagreeance" with you as to the usage of "agreeance."

The dictionary also states that the word "agreeance" was invented in the 1540s and is considered obsolete and a bastardization of 'agreement.'

Therefore, are we both in "agreeance" that you are an idiot?

I see you've used it in a sentence, well done!

Use the dictionary FIRST next time.

PALE, I am (as a single private individual) certainly not going to "run a champagne (sic) about feedlots/creek feeding...

Nicky, we are all private individuals. Please explain your hatred towards fellow animal’s lovers for 2 years Nicky. I put it to you ‘again’ you didn’t come into OLO to debate animal welfare at all. IMOP you came in OLO to rubbish our organization from day one and have never stopped. Why Nicky?
Nicky said
you don't even say where this is or what it's about, for God's sake.
Pale replies
For heavens sake Nicky= AUSTRALIA (and elsewhere for that matter)
I gave you all the details.

Dickie let me ask you as you also have contact with Animals Australia. Are you interested to look at this feed lot accreditation issue and pass the information onto them please?

It’s really quite straight forward. MLA has passed the accreditation powers over to the feed lot owners.
Farmers loose accreditation if they allow animals a larger space to walk around and still feed them grain. This seems unnecessarily cruel. It’s also a healthier environment not only for animals but humans if the animals are not packed in so tight they can hardly move because that is what causes diseases.

AA sit on the advisory boards as Nicky is always pointing out. I should think the feed lot accreditations require URGENT attention.

The question is Dickie are you prepared please to give this information to AA asking them to look at it urgently and address MLA or not please?
I will of course provide you with information. Although I did already post it.
Nicky said
If you hadn't managed to alienate everyone else in the animal advocacy movement you might be able to encourage someone else into helping you out.
Pale comments
Nicky we have never met anybody from AA or PETA. We did invite them many times to meet with ourselves and lawyers also Muslim Leaders to share the Animal welfare MOU.
They refused and black listed us instead.
Our lawyers found that interesting.

Well Dickie, you're doing a pretty good job of proving me right.

I never said there weren't insults coming from the other side of the debate. That's why I made that comment "I'm sure you can level any number of additional jibes at the rhetoric of your opponents, but I hardly think that will change anything."

Essentially, it was an invitation to rise above it. Of course, you haven't answered my question because you know the answer.

Nice to see you're keeping things relevant, too. You can also ask yourself whether it's changed anything.

Never mind then. Though if this was some attempt to convince me that PETA (or supporters of said organisation) isn't what I outlined in the last post, you're still failing.

In regard to each and every comment there, I invite readers to read what I was responding to and make their own judgement. I'll stand by each one.

'Hostile bigot' and 'damn ignorant' was in response to this:
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=1343&page=33

Immigrants are responsible for: "responsible for plotting to blow up the electricity grid, gang raping white girls, and bashing lifesavers, for starters."

Scotty's post and the one on Pauline's party was here:

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=1101&page=11
After calling immigrant supporters 'leftist pinkos' he said "The

"Kev's and the Davo's of the world will rise.
We will call it Day of the Bogan !"

The pauline question was a genuine one, judging by his immigrant rhetoric.

As for the English terms, I wasn't aware we were being tested, and yes, I'll use slang if I so desire. Though it's fortunate these posts aren't actually submissions, because you'd fail quite spectacularly as well, though I'm struggling to see the relevance of any of these attacks.

Dickie, if after perusing my posts as you clearly have done, the worst aspersion you can cast on my english skills is one instance of using the slang 'agreeance' instead of agreement, then I take it as a compliment. These forums are a place where talk is cheap, and proper grammar and english is very rare.

Whilst perusing my posts, you may also note that while I have indeed stooped to colourful comments regarding posters and their comments, I have never once stooped to seeking out what little personal information I can find on them, and using it in an irrelevant manner to smear them.

It does you no credit.

Nicky, I see your point about the ongoing smears and attacks. I can see that some of myopinions comments are indeed very strongly worded, but those coming from your side of the fence are just as nasty. The difference is, that the comments from yourself and Dickie are seen as being associated with PETA.

Perhaps this is not valid, and yes, that is unfair. But when a public organisation is involved in such disputes, they are expected to maintain a higher decorum and hold the moral high ground, as it were. Though given that neither you nor Dickie have openly identified yourself as PETA spokespeople, I suppose this doesn't necessarily apply. Given the hypothesis at the start of this thread however, the commentary hasn't helped.

And given the very personal attacks being launched, I'd say that they do indeed reflect badly on such imagery. I've seen many ugly comments on OLO, though that's the first time I've copped any direct comments which have clearly been selected on the basis of what little information they indicate about a personal life, which is regrettable, as I now see it's necessary to not even mention such scant personal details on even the vaguest details of ones own profession.