Is this really true?
in [Manchester United]
|
From: Lescor on 15 Mar 2010 12:35 "DC" <a(a)a.com> wrote in message news:op.u9gbxnc4wgp685(a)gateway-pc.lan... > On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 08:57:16 -0000, Lescor <lescor(a)btinternet.com> wrote: > >> >> >> "Diablos Rojos" <diablos_r0j0s(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message >> news:7vs7t6Ftu8U1(a)mid.individual.net... >>> >>> "DC" <a(a)a.com> wrote in message news:op.u9ejsoxcwgp685(a)gateway-pc.lan... >>>> On Thu, 11 Mar 2010 11:40:11 -0000, Lescor <lescor(a)btinternet.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> "Google Beta User" <wanyikuli(a)gmail.com> wrote in message >>>>> news:473358bb-bc32-4411-b3e8-e40af064bda5(a)q23g2000yqd.googlegroups.com... >>>>>> On Mar 10, 2:26 pm, italian...(a)gmail.com (SteveH) wrote: >>>>>> : >>>>>>> > An emotional attachment to a game where you claim to follow >>>>>>> nobody, > you're >>>>>>> > right I find it quite strange but to be perfectly frank I think >>>>>>> you're >>>>>>> > alleged impartiallity is absolute bollocks. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I was under the impression he was a johnny come lately Chelski fan. >>>>>> >>>>>> Correct. >>>>>> >>>>>> He knows football history, and is "cultured" (whtatever that means) >>>>>> but I've suspected since he burst onto the scene that he's an >>>>>> undercover Chelski fan. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Cultured? What the hell is that supposed to mean? I know football >>>>> because I have been watching it for (probably) far longer than any >>>>> other >>>>> around here, and did so mainly as a hard up working class lad standing >>>>> in the rain and freezing. >>>>> >>>>> Why understanding an interest which is not based on club bias is so >>>>> difficult to understand is beyond me. >>>>> >>>>> Try this for a concept. A lover of classical music.......but not only >>>>> Bach. >>>>> >>>>> Of good food.......but not only prime steak >>>>> Of Jazz.................. but not only Mulligan >>>>> Of ice cream.......but not only vanilla >>>>> Of art.............,,,, but not only Turner >>>>> Of opera......but not only Puccini >>>>> Of Drama......but not only Shakespeare >>>>> Of sport........but not only football. >>>>> Of gambling.....but not only poker....etc. >>>>> >>>>> Not difficult to understand is it? So why such a problem with adding >>>>> football >>>>> to the list? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> LC >>>> >>>> Answer me this does >>>> >>>> Does Steak compete directly with other food >> >> Absolutely irrelevant You seem to think that the drama which comes >> with competition is not as appreciated unless you support one of the >> competitors. Seems that the whole idea is "strange". >> But who enjoyed the MU 1 ---,Liverpool 4 game the most as a match. >> Who enjoyed the football? The mistakes? The drama? Me, who could >> not care less about the result, or the thousands of pissed off Man U >> fans? >> >> My list above is absolutely valid. It shows that it is possible, even >> very common, >> to have a love for,,,,, appreciation .....passion - call it what you >> like- for >> something without having a favourite. >> >> Believe it or not. I probably enjoyed Man U's last CL performance ( and >> Arsenals) >> just as much as you or their fans. >> >> LC >> > > Not one of your list was in direct competition and you know you were found > out. Steak and Fish argument my god thats a belter and you are right > completely irrelevant. Competitive sport can not be compared with deciding > which food you like or which opera you will watch. I could watch third > division French football and I would still find a reason to favour one > team over the other. But so do I, very often. I have my favourites in games, mainly because of the way they play, or the bad luck they have had etc, but I do NOT support any one side before all others. I admit to a preference to watching EPL sides clout top Euro sides, but not at the expense of distorting what I see, and not for all games or all sports. I don't understand you......not your support of a particular side, that is very common. but your lack of simple understanding. You admit that you are capable of watching and enjoying games of even minor foreign sides and mildly supporting one side or the other while you watch but, I assume, not with any great emotion regarding the result, but find it impossible to understand anyone who can also do the same watching EPL games. Why not? And the fact that those examples I quoted are not competitive IS irrelevant. They just point out that enjoyment of anything, including horse racing, (which I am quite deeply involved in) does not require having a personal fav. The contest brings its own excitement and drama, maybe even better appreciated by someone without a fan bias? I bet on racing a lot, but can - and probably will,-watch the Chelteham festival without having a bet, and i will enjoy every second of it. I could have included many items where there was direct competition, but my appreciation was not less because I watched it impartially. Try most of the Olympic games events. Try the Wimbledon final. .....the Super Bowl. Why do you find it so hard to understand that I can watch Arsenal v Chelsea or Man U v Liverpool with the same avid interest and enjoyment as I can watch the Olympic gymnasts performing minor miracles? You allow your opinions to be distorted by the bias of team support and assume that the whole world should be the same.....not so mate. > Besides you are currently trying to argue with several United fans which > is displaying a competitive nature if you were of a truly passive nature > you would be of a don't care attitude and left it at that. Thus it would > be impossible for you to enjoy over a long period as you claim a > competitive sport without taking a side. Its just not in your nature. You are correct. I do have a reasonably competitive nature, I spend much of the day (from very early am) studying and betting on the exchanges, and you cannot get more competitive than that. But, to succeed you also have to be very objective. Having pre-made favourites in racing or football is not a good idea. My bets might give me a short term interest in a result, but that is not the same as club support. Maybe my response s ( to kill time between races) is not so much competitive as a wish to enlighten, not easy with the fans in the major teams news groups. Maybe I find it very difficult to ignore the plight of some poor souls. who cannot accept the blindingly obvious. I once pointed out that the main requirement of any side expecting success in the top football leagues was , first of all, to be located in an area of extremely high population, simply because of potential gate money.. This obviously true comment, backed up by just studying 99% of league winners both here and in Europe since the maximum wage was abolished and cash earnings became vital, was contested by one poor soul who just could not accept that SAF would not have had the same great success if his club had been situated in Exeter.....or Kidderminster or wherever, with gates of 7 or 8 thousand. He ,typically, preferred to read it as a slight on SAF'S skill -)) Meanwhile, I would discourage anyone from backing St Albans to get to the EPL. even if they got Wenger, SAF and Jose to manage them in partnership. How can a good natured, sensible, caring man like me, let such idiocy pass without trying to correct it? It isn't competitive chum....it's just compassion. Now back to more important matters...................... LC > > -- > Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
From: Lescor on 15 Mar 2010 12:48 "chuck-spears" <chuck-spears(a)hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message news:29tmn.30861$XM7.10403(a)newsfe12.ams2... > > "Lescor" <lescor(a)btinternet.com> wrote in message > news:_v6dnaJ2VNZwnAfWnZ2dnUVZ7tOdnZ2d(a)bt.com... >> >> >> "Diablos Rojos" <diablos_r0j0s(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message >> news:7vs7t6Ftu8U1(a)mid.individual.net... >>> >>> "DC" <a(a)a.com> wrote in message news:op.u9ejsoxcwgp685(a)gateway-pc.lan... >>>> On Thu, 11 Mar 2010 11:40:11 -0000, Lescor <lescor(a)btinternet.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> "Google Beta User" <wanyikuli(a)gmail.com> wrote in message >>>>> news:473358bb-bc32-4411-b3e8-e40af064bda5(a)q23g2000yqd.googlegroups.com... >>>>>> On Mar 10, 2:26 pm, italian...(a)gmail.com (SteveH) wrote: >>>>>> : >>>>>>> > An emotional attachment to a game where you claim to follow >>>>>>> > nobody, you're >>>>>>> > right I find it quite strange but to be perfectly frank I think >>>>>>> you're >>>>>>> > alleged impartiallity is absolute bollocks. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I was under the impression he was a johnny come lately Chelski fan. >>>>>> >>>>>> Correct. >>>>>> >>>>>> He knows football history, and is "cultured" (whtatever that means) >>>>>> but I've suspected since he burst onto the scene that he's an >>>>>> undercover Chelski fan. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Cultured? What the hell is that supposed to mean? I know football >>>>> because I have been watching it for (probably) far longer than any >>>>> other >>>>> around here, and did so mainly as a hard up working class lad standing >>>>> in the rain and freezing. >>>>> >>>>> Why understanding an interest which is not based on club bias is so >>>>> difficult to understand is beyond me. >>>>> >>>>> Try this for a concept. A lover of classical music.......but not only >>>>> Bach. >>>>> >>>>> Of good food.......but not only prime steak >>>>> Of Jazz.................. but not only Mulligan >>>>> Of ice cream.......but not only vanilla >>>>> Of art.............,,,, but not only Turner >>>>> Of opera......but not only Puccini >>>>> Of Drama......but not only Shakespeare >>>>> Of sport........but not only football. >>>>> Of gambling.....but not only poker....etc. >>>>> >>>>> Not difficult to understand is it? So why such a problem with adding >>>>> football >>>>> to the list? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> LC >>>> >>>> Answer me this does >>>> >>>> Does Steak compete directly with other food >> >> Absolutely irrelevant You seem to think that the drama which comes >> with competition is not as appreciated unless you support one of the >> competitors. Seems that the whole idea is "strange". >> But who enjoyed the MU 1 ---,Liverpool 4 game the most as a match. >> Who enjoyed the football? The mistakes? The drama? Me, who could >> not care less about the result, or the thousands of pissed off Man U >> fans? >> >> My list above is absolutely valid. It shows that it is possible, even >> very common, >> to have a love for,,,,, appreciation .....passion - call it what you >> like- for >> something without having a favourite. >> >> Believe it or not. I probably enjoyed Man U's last CL performance ( and >> Arsenals) >> just as much as you or their fans. >> >> LC >> > > I couldn't disagree more. I'm even going to bother with this, the > evidence is all around and you don't even have to experience the highs and > lows, irrational as they may be, to acknowledge, that to watch a game > without any emotional involvement, dulls the intensity of the experience. But why does "emotional involvement" only come with bias, according to you.. The degree of emotional involvement might differ( I wouldn't dispute this as I have too often seen fans in tears,) but other things compensate When a fancied side gets stuffed at home by a far smaller club, 50.000 leave the ground or turn off the TV absolutely pissed off. Who ENJOYED the game more.....them or me? LC. > >
From: DC on 15 Mar 2010 13:28 On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 16:48:49 -0000, Lescor <lescor(a)btinternet.com> wrote: > > > "chuck-spears" <chuck-spears(a)hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message > news:29tmn.30861$XM7.10403(a)newsfe12.ams2... >> >> "Lescor" <lescor(a)btinternet.com> wrote in message >> news:_v6dnaJ2VNZwnAfWnZ2dnUVZ7tOdnZ2d(a)bt.com... >>> >>> >>> "Diablos Rojos" <diablos_r0j0s(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message >>> news:7vs7t6Ftu8U1(a)mid.individual.net... >>>> >>>> "DC" <a(a)a.com> wrote in message >>>> news:op.u9ejsoxcwgp685(a)gateway-pc.lan... >>>>> On Thu, 11 Mar 2010 11:40:11 -0000, Lescor <lescor(a)btinternet.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> "Google Beta User" <wanyikuli(a)gmail.com> wrote in message >>>>>> news:473358bb-bc32-4411-b3e8-e40af064bda5(a)q23g2000yqd.googlegroups.com... >>>>>>> On Mar 10, 2:26 pm, italian...(a)gmail.com (SteveH) wrote: >>>>>>> : >>>>>>>> > An emotional attachment to a game where you claim to follow > >>>>>>>> nobody, you're >>>>>>>> > right I find it quite strange but to be perfectly frank I think >>>>>>>> you're >>>>>>>> > alleged impartiallity is absolute bollocks. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I was under the impression he was a johnny come lately Chelski >>>>>>>> fan. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Correct. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> He knows football history, and is "cultured" (whtatever that means) >>>>>>> but I've suspected since he burst onto the scene that he's an >>>>>>> undercover Chelski fan. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Cultured? What the hell is that supposed to mean? I know football >>>>>> because I have been watching it for (probably) far longer than any >>>>>> other >>>>>> around here, and did so mainly as a hard up working class lad >>>>>> standing >>>>>> in the rain and freezing. >>>>>> >>>>>> Why understanding an interest which is not based on club bias is so >>>>>> difficult to understand is beyond me. >>>>>> >>>>>> Try this for a concept. A lover of classical music.......but not >>>>>> only Bach. >>>>>> >>>>>> Of good food.......but not only prime steak >>>>>> Of Jazz.................. but not only Mulligan >>>>>> Of ice cream.......but not only vanilla >>>>>> Of art.............,,,, but not only Turner >>>>>> Of opera......but not only Puccini >>>>>> Of Drama......but not only Shakespeare >>>>>> Of sport........but not only football. >>>>>> Of gambling.....but not only poker....etc. >>>>>> >>>>>> Not difficult to understand is it? So why such a problem with >>>>>> adding football >>>>>> to the list? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> LC >>>>> >>>>> Answer me this does >>>>> >>>>> Does Steak compete directly with other food >>> >>> Absolutely irrelevant You seem to think that the drama which comes >>> with competition is not as appreciated unless you support one of the >>> competitors. Seems that the whole idea is "strange". >>> But who enjoyed the MU 1 ---,Liverpool 4 game the most as a match. >>> Who enjoyed the football? The mistakes? The drama? Me, who could >>> not care less about the result, or the thousands of pissed off Man U >>> fans? >>> >>> My list above is absolutely valid. It shows that it is possible, even >>> very common, >>> to have a love for,,,,, appreciation .....passion - call it what you >>> like- for >>> something without having a favourite. >>> >>> Believe it or not. I probably enjoyed Man U's last CL performance ( >>> and Arsenals) >>> just as much as you or their fans. >>> >>> LC >>> >> >> I couldn't disagree more. I'm even going to bother with this, the >> evidence is all around and you don't even have to experience the highs >> and lows, irrational as they may be, to acknowledge, that to watch a >> game without any emotional involvement, dulls the intensity of the >> experience. > > But why does "emotional involvement" only come with bias, according to > you.. The degree of emotional involvement might differ( I wouldn't > dispute > this as I have too often seen fans in tears,) but other things compensate > When a fancied side gets stuffed at home by a far smaller club, 50.000 > leave the ground or turn off the TV absolutely pissed off. > > Who ENJOYED the game more.....them or me? > > LC. > If you assume fans are deflated in defeat how come you fail to connect their attachment in victory. Would the opposite of you say here not be true? If a fans team is in the European cup final and wins would it be fair to assume they enjoyed the game more than a "neutral" with this added emotional attachment you now recognise? If so is it possible for a "Neutral" to enjoy a United victory as much as a United fan? -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
From: DC on 15 Mar 2010 13:49 On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 16:35:57 -0000, Lescor <lescor(a)btinternet.com> wrote: > > > "DC" <a(a)a.com> wrote in message news:op.u9gbxnc4wgp685(a)gateway-pc.lan... >> On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 08:57:16 -0000, Lescor <lescor(a)btinternet.com> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> "Diablos Rojos" <diablos_r0j0s(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message >>> news:7vs7t6Ftu8U1(a)mid.individual.net... >>>> >>>> "DC" <a(a)a.com> wrote in message >>>> news:op.u9ejsoxcwgp685(a)gateway-pc.lan... >>>>> On Thu, 11 Mar 2010 11:40:11 -0000, Lescor <lescor(a)btinternet.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> "Google Beta User" <wanyikuli(a)gmail.com> wrote in message >>>>>> news:473358bb-bc32-4411-b3e8-e40af064bda5(a)q23g2000yqd.googlegroups.com... >>>>>>> On Mar 10, 2:26 pm, italian...(a)gmail.com (SteveH) wrote: >>>>>>> : >>>>>>>> > An emotional attachment to a game where you claim to follow >>>>>>>> nobody, > you're >>>>>>>> > right I find it quite strange but to be perfectly frank I think >>>>>>>> you're >>>>>>>> > alleged impartiallity is absolute bollocks. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I was under the impression he was a johnny come lately Chelski >>>>>>>> fan. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Correct. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> He knows football history, and is "cultured" (whtatever that means) >>>>>>> but I've suspected since he burst onto the scene that he's an >>>>>>> undercover Chelski fan. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Cultured? What the hell is that supposed to mean? I know football >>>>>> because I have been watching it for (probably) far longer than any >>>>>> other >>>>>> around here, and did so mainly as a hard up working class lad >>>>>> standing >>>>>> in the rain and freezing. >>>>>> >>>>>> Why understanding an interest which is not based on club bias is so >>>>>> difficult to understand is beyond me. >>>>>> >>>>>> Try this for a concept. A lover of classical music.......but not >>>>>> only Bach. >>>>>> >>>>>> Of good food.......but not only prime steak >>>>>> Of Jazz.................. but not only Mulligan >>>>>> Of ice cream.......but not only vanilla >>>>>> Of art.............,,,, but not only Turner >>>>>> Of opera......but not only Puccini >>>>>> Of Drama......but not only Shakespeare >>>>>> Of sport........but not only football. >>>>>> Of gambling.....but not only poker....etc. >>>>>> >>>>>> Not difficult to understand is it? So why such a problem with >>>>>> adding football >>>>>> to the list? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> LC >>>>> >>>>> Answer me this does >>>>> >>>>> Does Steak compete directly with other food >>> >>> Absolutely irrelevant You seem to think that the drama which comes >>> with competition is not as appreciated unless you support one of the >>> competitors. Seems that the whole idea is "strange". >>> But who enjoyed the MU 1 ---,Liverpool 4 game the most as a match. >>> Who enjoyed the football? The mistakes? The drama? Me, who could >>> not care less about the result, or the thousands of pissed off Man U >>> fans? >>> >>> My list above is absolutely valid. It shows that it is possible, even >>> very common, >>> to have a love for,,,,, appreciation .....passion - call it what you >>> like- for >>> something without having a favourite. >>> >>> Believe it or not. I probably enjoyed Man U's last CL performance ( >>> and Arsenals) >>> just as much as you or their fans. >>> >>> LC >>> >> >> Not one of your list was in direct competition and you know you were >> found out. Steak and Fish argument my god thats a belter and you are >> right completely irrelevant. Competitive sport can not be compared with >> deciding which food you like or which opera you will watch. I could >> watch third division French football and I would still find a reason to >> favour one team over the other. > > But so do I, very often. I have my favourites in games, mainly because > of the way they play, or the bad luck they have had etc, but I do NOT > support > any one side before all others. I admit to a preference to watching > EPL sides > clout top Euro sides, but not at the expense of distorting what I see, > and not > for all games or all sports. > > I don't understand you......not your support of a particular side, that > is very > common. but your lack of simple understanding. You admit that you are > capable of watching and enjoying games of even minor foreign sides > and mildly supporting one side or the other while you watch but, I > assume, > not with any great emotion regarding the result, but find it impossible > to > understand anyone who can also do the same watching EPL games. > Why not? Because without emotion why debate it. I wouldn't go to a French/Spanish/Italian or even 2nd division football forum and discuss the finer points of individual games because I simply don't care. Once the game is over thats it. I like Fish and chips but don't discuss the finer points of Fish V Steak with anyone to be honest and doubt you do. > > And the fact that those examples I quoted are not competitive IS > irrelevant. > They just point out that enjoyment of anything, including horse racing, > (which I am quite deeply involved in) does not require having a personal > fav. Do you participate in discussion on any of the topics listed earlier in public forums? > The contest brings its own excitement and drama, maybe even better > appreciated by someone without a fan bias? I bet on racing a lot, but > can - and probably will,-watch the Chelteham festival without having > a bet, and i will enjoy every second of it. > > I could have included many items where there was direct competition, > but my appreciation was not less because I watched it impartially. Try > most > of the Olympic games events. Try the Wimbledon final. .....the Super > Bowl. I assume you participate in debate on public forums for all these also. > Why do you find it so hard to understand that I can watch Arsenal v > Chelsea > or Man U v Liverpool with the same avid interest and enjoyment as I can > watch the Olympic gymnasts performing minor miracles? > > You allow your opinions to be distorted by the bias of team support and > assume that the whole world should be the same.....not so mate. > No I don't just human behavior simply that. > >> Besides you are currently trying to argue with several United fans >> which is displaying a competitive nature if you were of a truly passive >> nature you would be of a don't care attitude and left it at that. Thus >> it would be impossible for you to enjoy over a long period as you claim >> a competitive sport without taking a side. Its just not in your nature. > > > You are correct. I do have a reasonably competitive nature, I spend > much of the day (from very early am) studying and betting on the > exchanges, > and you cannot get more competitive than that. But, to succeed you also > have to be very objective. Having pre-made favourites in racing or > football > is not a good idea. My bets might give me a short term interest in a > result, > but that is not the same as club support. > > Maybe my response s ( to kill time between races) is not so much > competitive > as a wish to enlighten, not easy with the fans in the major teams news > groups. > Maybe I find it very difficult to ignore the plight of some poor souls. > who cannot > accept the blindingly obvious. > > I once pointed out that the main requirement of any side expecting > success > in the top football leagues was , first of all, to be located in an > area of > extremely high population, simply because of potential gate money.. This > obviously true comment, backed up by just studying 99% of league winners > both here and in Europe since the maximum wage was abolished and cash > earnings became vital, was contested by one poor soul who just could not > accept that SAF would not have had the same great success if his club > had been situated in Exeter.....or Kidderminster or wherever, with gates > of > 7 or 8 thousand. He ,typically, preferred to read it as a slight on > SAF'S skill -)) > Meanwhile, I would discourage anyone from backing St Albans to get to > the EPL. even if they got Wenger, SAF and Jose to manage them in > partnership. > > How can a good natured, sensible, caring man like me, let such idiocy > pass > without trying to correct it? > Maybe so but its a bit of a nonsensical debate and probably deserved the answer. > It isn't competitive chum....it's just compassion. > If thats the case then you may have more success banging your head against the wall. > > Now back to more important matters...................... > > > LC > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ > -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
From: Red Rackham on 15 Mar 2010 17:22
"Lescor" > Maybe my response s ( to kill time between races) is not so much > competitive > as a wish to enlighten, An impossible task for someone who is himself in denial. You support Chelsea. Why you continue to evade this fact is truly bizarre. not easy with the fans in the major teams news > groups. > Maybe I find it very difficult to ignore the plight of some poor souls. > who cannot > accept the blindingly obvious. > > I once pointed out that the main requirement of any side expecting success > in the top football leagues was , first of all, to be located in an area > of > extremely high population, simply because of potential gate money.. This > obviously true comment, backed up by just studying 99% of league winners > both here and in Europe since the maximum wage was abolished and cash > earnings became vital, was contested by one poor soul who just could not > accept that SAF would not have had the same great success if his club > had been situated in Exeter.....or Kidderminster or wherever, with gates > of > 7 or 8 thousand. He ,typically, preferred to read it as a slight on SAF'S > skill -)) No mate, he preferred to read it as it was, a truism so blindingly obvious that it was only uttered to belittle his achievements. You keep avoiding the bits where you were made to look a chump with your arsey (and incorrect) pronouncements of the relative populations you listed. You'll ignore this again, no doubt. You also fail to recognise that SAF enjoyed much success at clubs where there was only a small population, but again, this doesn't fit with your nonsense so I expect you'll ignore it. > Meanwhile, I would discourage anyone from backing St Albans to get to > the EPL. even if they got Wenger, SAF and Jose to manage them in > partnership. > > How can a good natured, sensible, caring man like me, let such idiocy pass > without trying to correct it? There you go Les, trying to rewrite history again. It was ME correcting YOUR idiocy. But some idiots just won't be told. HTH |