Foxy,

So you have 'known' Joe for about the same time you've been threatening to IGNORE me. That's not believable either. Don't you know what ignore means? And how does Joe's knowing that you stacked bookshelves for a living show that you 'know' him! Your delusions are really a serious problem if you think you can know anyone who is just a name on a computer screen.

I make "assumptions" about people, do I? I beg your pardon, but you often say that people can be judged by their posts. That doesn't apply to your posts also? Just everyone else's? I suppose it's not surprising that you muddle up all the nonsense you come up with and forget what you said the last time you let fly at someone.

Joe doesn't have a "stance" on this subject; he has lived it. He doesn't get second hand tripe from the ABC and blow it out his backside like certain people do. He is the one with the facts, not you. It's unnecessary for him to be disputing your cockeyed ideology.

Yes. I admit to being sometimes sarcastic. I was sarcastic about your reason for not being able to face OLO for a while, and you thanked me for my concern! It's pretty hard not to be sarcastic occasionally with someone who keeps saying that she will ignore me but continues to come back for more. I won't be putting "a sock in it", and I doubt that your artificially inflated ego will allow you to ignore me. Like your mate, SteeleRedux, who claims to also ignore me, you couldn't vent your spleen against me because that would prove that you were lying

ttbn,

1) Joe has told us about his wife, his life,
his children, and other personal
details over his years on the forum. The information came
from him. I also researched his work - thus expanding
my knowledge.

2) I am a qualified librarian, researcher, consultant,
and also an author.

3) I ignore you most of the time - but am obliged
to respond to false assumptions and misinformation.

4) I do not lie.

5) I back up my discussions with relevant links.
Many of the views expressed are those of experts on
the topics being discussed - and are not necessarily
my own personal views. I don't agree with all the
information I cite. I merely present alternate
viewpoints for discussion.

6) Labeling, smearing, and attacking people is your forte
and method of operation on this forum.

I do tend to ignore you most of the time. We all do.
Note that Steele does not respond to you at all. Neither
do so many. In actual fact most of the time we don't even
bother reading your posts. They unfortunately do not
provide anything of any substance.

You see the world in very rigid and stereotypical terms.
You display a distinctive set of traits, including
conformity, intolerance, and insecurity, that seem
typical of many prejudiced people.

Those who have these personality patterns tend to be bullies
as well. They tend to have anti-intellectual and anti
scientific attitudes , they are disturbed by any ambiguity
in sexual or religious matters and as already stated
they see the world in very rigid and sterotypical terms.

I suspect that -

you're primarily a product of an environment which was
cold, aloof, disciplinarian, and bigoted. Sadly there's
no cure for that now.

BTW - when I thanked you - it was done tongue-in-cheek.
Obviously too subtle for you.

BTW: I was not familiar with the term - "harridan."

I looked it up and it's not quite apt. I'm not that
old.

But I did look up the male equivalent. The terms -

"Douche-bag, reprobate, and of course - the old chestnut -
R Sol - appeared.

So you don't know him any better than others.
It all boils down to book stacking. You are no author.
You have no such obligation.
You could be lying by saying you don't. We don't know.
Your "relevant links" are just someone else's opinions.
Sounds like you are describing yourself.

"We". You are authorised to speak for everyone? Steele does not respond for the reason I gave: it would prove that he is lying when he says he doesn't read my posts. You don't take much in at all.

You even pretend to be capable of analysing me. Been into the pop psychology paperbacks again.

You had to look up harradin! You were most definitely not a librarian. Everything about you is make believe, you poor fool.

ttbn,

As I told you earlier - unless you have something
of substance to contribute - put a sock in it.

Or better still - in language you'll understand -

Blow it out of your arse!

ttbn,

BTW: "Harridan" is an archaic term that is not used
by many today.

Neither is "strumpet," "harpy,"
"shrew," or in the case of males - "reprobate."