I think I annoyed Poirot a number of times in referring to her as a
labour party computer.
She was so one eyed it was hard not to make fun of her.
Foxy was a different matter, she tried hard to steer a middle course.

I think many have been turned off from putting down posts on this page due to the following reasons:

1. If you provide links to support your argument, then you’re link-bombing;

2. If you provide no l links to support your argument, then you’re asserting;

3. If you’re asked what your qualifications are and you mention them, then you’re big-noting yourself;

4. If the other side has no rational arguments and you mention that before you get to demonstrate it, then you’re displaying hubris;

5. If you pursue a point because there are continual flaws in your opponent’s every response, then you’re an ideologue;

6. If your reasoning is solid and others are uncomfortable with it, then you’re smart and are deliberately making a point of it;

7. If your opponent has defended their position from multiple angles and you’ve successfully countered them all, then you’re point-scoring;

8. You just can’t win.

But posting on this page shouldn't be just be about winning. That is why this webpage address is: http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/. For too many, they feel a need for an award or gold medal at the Olympics, to keep their adrenaline going, when posting what they decide to on this website.

You missed one.
If you worry about all those things then you're worrying too much.

Dear Nathan,

«I think many have been turned off from putting down posts on this page due to the following reasons:»

I have not posted lately due to being too busy.
While I am glad to have a place where I can express my views. I find that I have no time for protracted arguments which make me compromise on my other duties. If I want to be able to manage my time responsibly, I need to be very selective about where and when to post.

Hi there BAZZ, NATHANJ, ARMCHAIR CRITIC & YUYUTSU...

Thank you gentlemen for your thoughts on this matter. All I wish to add is I don't believe it's any individual contributor (other than perhaps mea culpa) who's played a major role in causing our perfumed colleagues to seek more agreeable Sites.

It's more of a general decline in both the quality and constituent elements of the Topics, as well as some unsavoury behaviour emanating from one or two contributors, that's essentially to blame ? Some of you may have other ideas of which I'd be most grateful if you'd appraise me of any thoughts or suggestions you may have.

Hello Yuyutsu,

What I put down, was nearly 95% (of exact wordings) from a online poster on this page (on another topic), thrown in my face, about lodging comments on this page.

It's a very clever debating technique used by these "deniers" of an issue, that being to stay within the limits of a discussion topic and will try and exhaust people out of a discussion - and it does work.

It also shows how much they are willing to write (in terms of their own benefit) and their desire to essentially win the argument (in their own way) rather than allow people to put down opinions or viewpoints of their own.

I'd questioned this person's use of constant words (for their own benefit) and this was proven (to some level), by the large level of listings that were put, towards the end of the discussion (about eight).

I had no more to say after that. My point was (somewhat), if not was proven, by the large level of writing put and I really didn't need or want to say any more.