Member Info for NikeAir180

.... confidance in my spelling? - presence. 👌

12:31 was already answered at 12:26 by "than is at...".

At the end of the day not everyone or perhaps anyone deserves scorn, but perhaps the no hope bit was confidance in one's own presense, fair enough but where patience might be a virtue so might a more chilled out attitude.

Ha ha... I don't remembed him ever talking about garlic bread. Fish and chips, coconut juice if it was a very hot day perhaps - at a time when a few us were being less minerally conscious. 🌕

... when good will is commonly wished to all.

It was perhaps because of the non-specificity of a general time period rather than a momemt, that I naturally wanted to say where - might have been okay in the context of spacetime, but was still a meaningful difference.

Honestly (joking) I think I am still missing the garlic bread (don't think they charged for it) which they forgot to pack as well as the kebab after busy moments, when I was buying a couple of essentials. Alternatively I can't remeber eating it, which is slightly perturbing. : )

On the positive side, it's a new week in a new month where good will is commonly wished to all...

Returning to 09:01, I didn't take it literally. : )

If there is only water so far, there always seems to be a mistake...

, never

I mean to respect that better in future.

Theeeduke, those posts were after a few beers and before a not to cool kebab, when do you remember News posting in such cicumstances? I'll answer for you never. We don't know each other so I don't know for certain but I would bet a kebab and chips on it.

With a lot of respect... : )

Actually, 01:09... re. time of day... within 01:46.

Aah yes, people can have a different perspective on "yesterday" depending on the time - which contributed to mixing up my response at 13:09 re. threads.

That said, having re-read 16:04 from Specinvestor99 on friday, Banbury continues to be wrong at 13:44, yesterday, for relevant reasons that I have given today.

Yawn... No it doesn't re. 13:44, a very considered reply by David was building on aspects of posts in a thread opened by Helpful. I appreciate without agreeing with Spec's humourus comments on the Cheer Up thread, the post at 13:38 built on Helpful's opening post and his comments within this thread.

It's not biscuits and tea, is it.

Re 15:18: Banbury - if you'd had a pub lunch, do you think you would be less inclined to make stuff up?

Theeeduke, I think the RRAL licences have always been in a good place and that remains the core reason why I Iike RRR, I like their asset exposure in general and really am not too concerned about current issues though not ignorant of them.

We remain as far away as the crow flies at a time that some people are having a pub lunch.

Re. 11:49: the quotation is not mentioning that, to which the first following sentence refers.

Ironically, I just realised I'm wrong at 11:00 because of Banbury's reply at 10:34.

The replies on this thread contain no insult Banbury.

The way it was written had aspects of thought experiment and rhetorical question, without aspects of prediction.

Re. the 14:52 and 14:49 from Banbury, given the context: it's the implied conflation, which gives it a little bit, of a whiff of the mendacious.

If 16:05 was bearing in mind 15:38, you continued to talk tosh.