Who's talking about you? It ~was~ yourself whom accused myself, or don't you recall?This will be divided into two continuing posts, since my original attempt exceeds the character limit...
You are picking an argument with one who is not going to provide rationale, as you may have now noticed from his response. There is nothing you can say, unless you you offer complete agreement with him, that will have any credibility in any fashion or form, in his opinion. Therefore, you are automatically labeled "anti" among other defamatory verbiage he chooses to "justify" his so-called "reasoning."
This is only an example of his "reasoning":
In POST# 79, I asked (txauctioneer):
Well, let's see here. Please point out the POST#'s where the following occurred, and the relevant remarks pertaining thereto:
tried to discredit others through menacing words
threats to sue
You never got back!
Now here you are AGAIN making the same accusations.
PUT UP or SHUT UP.
So, I'll take another unmerited moment to illustrate my point, in reference to his repeated response and thinking that he has provided anything that offers rational thinking, much less proved anything by his irrational ramblings.
assumptions - I never made assumptions.
Once again: It was >YOURSELF< who accused myself ... Or, don't you recall? irrational statements - I or anyone else, do not provide any rational statements, unless they unequivocally agree with his views.
Once again: It was >YOURSELF< who accused myself ... Or, don't you recall? tried to discredit others through menacing words
So, PUT UP, or SHUT UP!