I suggested cutting him some "slack", not some "slag"...Steve Bliven wrote:It was announced on the radio this am that today is Mr. Flatley's 52nd birthday. Perhaps cut him some slack for the day...?
Best wishes.
Steve
I suggested cutting him some "slack", not some "slag"...Steve Bliven wrote:It was announced on the radio this am that today is Mr. Flatley's 52nd birthday. Perhaps cut him some slack for the day...?
Now just hold on there a minute, my friend. Just where did I slag him after your post? I for one took it to heart, and in response put forth honestly and to all a challenging, possibly illuminating, and probably very unpopular opinion in the name of self-examination. In case it was not altogether clear, I want to assure you that I was quite serious, and I venture to suggest that those who assume I was joking would be those for whom my hypothesis is a painful possibility to face. If it's taken as being put lightheartedly, this should not matter, for let me point out the reality that being lighthearted does not by definition mean issuing jabs or being insincere, and for my part this was not some cowardly attempt at over-cloaking a slag beyond recognition. I like to think I have a bit more class than that.Steve Bliven wrote:I suggested cutting him some "slack", not some "slag"...Steve Bliven wrote:It was announced on the radio this am that today is Mr. Flatley's 52nd birthday. Perhaps cut him some slack for the day...?
Best wishes.
Steve
Just so's I'm clear - at no point did I consider that you slagged Mr. Flatley. I read your post when it appeared, noted that it contained the word "slagfest" and decided to play about with the similarity between that and "slack".Nanohedron wrote:Now just hold on there a minute, my friend. Just where did I slag him after your post? I for one took it to heart, and in response put forth honestly and to all a challenging, possibly illuminating, and probably very unpopular opinion in the name of self-examination. In case it was not altogether clear, I want to assure you that I was quite serious, and I venture to suggest that those who assume I was joking would be those for whom my hypothesis is a painful possibility to face. If it's taken as being put lightheartedly, this should not matter, for let me point out the reality that being lighthearted does not by definition mean issuing jabs or being insincere, and for my part this was not some cowardly attempt at over-cloaking a slag beyond recognition. I like to think I have a bit more class than that.
Just so's you know. Try reading it again, please.
I think you'd better re-read even some more.Steve Bliven wrote:Besides, you're a Moderator and Moderators don't slag.
there's you, Brad, that Harry feller....David Migoya wrote:fact is, he outplays everyone here
David Migoya wrote: . . . and yes, that's the Album cover. On Wacker Drive, no?
and a couple of others also, but not very active on the forum...there's you, Brad, that Harry feller....
it was by no means an attempt at an inclusive list.Othannen wrote:and a couple of others also, but not very active on the forum...there's you, Brad, that Harry feller....