Examinator

Therefore, I conclude from your last post that we are not going to see even a rough draft of your submission anytime soon?

examinator

<< Me poor? hmmmm "driven" (?) to rant (?)hmmmm? *I* don't think so. A rant is an irrational selfish out burst. While I can concede I was trying to get the topic back on the rails the irrational bit flummoxes me. >>

Dear examinator, I was referring to your 'What's Your Rant' thread and your opening comment there -

<< After the blinding success on my last topic on "are we breeding purebreds to death' ... >>

I wasn't suggesting you were ranting here at all. I was only picking up on your OWN choice of term in that other thread and your admission there that this thread had gone off track. Not BTW that that was appearing to worry anyone else very much. :)

What's up? Such gentle subtleties aren't usually lost on you. :)

Bronwyn,
Sorry missed that one. Drat! well I haven't been to the corner in a while...I guess it's time.

The rant post was an experiment of the system and some posters for my own perverse amusement. I know, I know the corner.(sigh) as I trudge off.

'The rant post was an experiment of the system and some posters for my own perverse amusement. '

You're getting more like me every day. And you thought you were better then me. That's me 101. Hypocrite.

What second question, examinator?

>>Pericles, You still refuse to look at the second question and therefore intended context. You were part of the irrelevance.<<

I had another look, and I found:

>>Pericles How are your answers etc in context to the question as posted? 'What do you think should be done about 'breeding pure bred dogs to death' for cosmetics? and therefore 'what do you think should done?'<<

The second question, if I am reading the correct post, is "what do you think should done?"

I'm assuming there is a missing "be" in there, but I could be wrong on that as well.

I thought I had made it clear what I think should done... errr... be done, in my last-but-one post:

>>My definitive statement on the question is that breeding any dog 'to death", pure breed or no, should be illegal.<<

Perhaps I could be clearer on the action required.

My definitive statement on the question is that breeding any dog 'to death', pure breed or no, should be made illegal.

That should cover it, don't you think?

Succinct. Specific.

And entirely relevant.

pontificator,

'I await your efforts with measured anticipation....or were those words as usual, full of BS. '

Graham would never post any of our efforts (even if serious, I would try y'know, and not just writing in the vernacular) until we qualify as 'social commentators' or 'royal watchers'. I'm looking into what qualifies you for this, but cant seem to find the course in any of the universities I've looked at. Antiseptic gave me some hints of the career path required.

Anyway you're only anticipating the chance to mock my efforts, and I wouldn't give a sucker like you an even break. You're the worlds most altruistic counsellor (as you reminded us again recently on Nina's thread) so why don't you make an effort. But I'm doubtful you'd be able get the punctuation right, I think they'd expect commas and stuff.