Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Pierre
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Graham
And, in my opinion, this is the tactic of "declaring victory" in the hope that nobody will notice that you haven't made your arguments at all
|
You have a way far too high opinion of yourself.
Who said anything about declaring victory? as if a perceived "victory" over you would give me any pleasure. 
This is not a competition, well it might be to you, it's a discussion. |
And you need to get off your High Horse.
If you are going to have a discussion, discuss, don't simply say "I've made my arguments and , in my opinion, you have failed to convincingly argue against them." because that doesn't contribute anything to the debate (note: *not* a "competition"), but looks like an attempt to dismiss my points instead of countering them.
Quote:
|
All I said, if you read it for what it is, is that I have made my points, and you have made yours.
|
No, the implication is that I have *failed* to make my points, seemingly because you don't want to accept my arguments are valid.
Quote:
|
Therefore, I do not see the reason for continuing the discussion any further.
|
Neither do I.
__________________
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Xaccers
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Graham
extra workers had to be drafted in to supplement those working at the Criminal Records Bureau in order to do all the checks the government all of a sudden required after Soham.
|
Thanks for that, now I've got a vision of goverment pen pushers running round after burglars and muggers!  |
Now substitute that vision for one of the Police needing to carry out checks but being unable to because everyone's looking at the backgrounds of people working or wanting to work with children.
Quote:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Graham
In which case you could have made it clearer since it followed immediately after a comment that was definitely directed at me.
|
I thought I had by giving a line break and discussing something which you hadn't said.
|
You thought incorrectly.
Just going on to a new paragraph doesn't mean you're changing the subject.
See?
Quote:
|
I'd sing a song right now, but you'd probably think that was about you...
|
Depending on the song, you may well mean it to be about me, but would then claim that "oh, but I didn't *say* it was about you".
Please, Xaccers, I've been doing e-forums for too long now to be impressed or fooled by that sort of thing.
Quote:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Graham
*I* have more sense...!
|
So rather than ensure that things get done to your standards you decline the chance, oh well, that's your choice I suppose.
Stick with the tried and tested "I don't like it, I can't give any evidence to back up why it would be a bad thing, and I don't see why I should suggest something better" argument.
|
Oh dear, and this is *another* sort of thing that I am neither impressed nor fooled by and is about as logical as the "if you don't vote you can't complain" argument, but this time it's extended to "if you don't run for office yourself you can't complain"...
No, I cannot give "evidence" to back up why it would be a bad thing, just as those who have argued it favour of it have not given "evidence" for why it would be a *good* thing.
I have opinions on the subject and I have given related examples to back up my position. I have suggested something better in that it would be an improvement for the Government to remove red tape and form filling duties from the Police to let them get on with their jobs.
All of that can be seen from my previous posts and now, as with Pierre, I see little purpose in continuing this discussion further.
