That's where you're wrong, Houellie.

Why today I've planted tomatoes, made gingerbread, helped son with fractions, did some sewing repairs and cleaned out the chook house...I also noticed grass growing (too fast)...OLO is a mere diversion from life - it's mainly an exercise in rhetorical gymnastics, as in a bit of frivolous debate/discussion is better than a crossword.

Why didn't you include SM alongside your critique of 579 and Diamond Pete on the subject of high-horse harping righteousness?

Oh Poirot, so productive, this will never do. I hope you're not time-poor? Please don't tell me we have here an example of the feminists' time-poor juggler, a proud member of the downtrodden martyrs of society;-)

Yes you are right there Poirot, I shouldn't have left the prime example out, but my familiarity with his MO somehow didn't make him remarkable enough. These new shrill brothers (or sisters) are really tiresome. I feel this exercise, and the hair splitting being employed by all, is really not befitting the intellect of those concerned, I suppose that is the main cause of my distaste.

But I always support the underdog too, and the goings on about Tony (Who incidentally I cant stand) are getting so shrill, and SM has you three against his one voice here, going on ad-finfitum, well, who can blame me for omitting the benign dronings of the rusted on juliar hater. He's part of the wall paper.

Actually I think SM is Gerard Henderson. Or maybe the love child of Piers and Albrechtsen.

I can see your point, Houellie.

It does seem SM has attracted some increased opposition.

I'm definitely not time poor. All those tasks are merely part of the day - and it doesn't include running around like a tornado in the mornings and being catapulted out into the throng at rush hour.

(P.S. the gingerb-bread men were a combined maths/direction-following exercise for son - and we get to eat the result : )

Poirot,

"Yes, yes, we all know how clear and penetrable is legal jargon"

There was no legal jargon in what I've posted, Perhaps I've over estimated you. If reading a dictionary definition surpasses your competence.

H,

We can always rely on you to bring in the mundane.

SM,

"There was no legal jargon in what I've posted..."

I didn't say you posted legal jargon.

You said:

"Anyone familiar with legal texts such as contracts will recognise the style as written to be deliberately clear and unambiguous."

My comment was in reply to the sentence above.

"If reading a dictionary definition surpasses your competence."

I read it, Mr Shirty. I understood it. I also understand that you're obsessed with being proved right, and running off to the dictionary in search of some long-winded definition is about your speed.

Most entertaining!