the stinking enigma Posted November 21, 2020 Share Posted November 21, 2020 Sorry, not you Rachel, it was more the summing up post by hmmm. As if it was to be forwarded to someone else. I didn't explain it very well, it just seemed a weird thing for hmmm to write after quoting your post. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rachomics Posted November 21, 2020 Share Posted November 21, 2020 1 minute ago, the stinking enigma said: Sorry, not you Rachel, it was more the summing up post by hmmm. As if it was to be forwarded to someone else. I didn't explain it very well, it just seemed a weird thing for hmmm to write after quoting your post. It's OK, I was getting confused too. Quotes of quotes being quoted Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the stinking enigma Posted November 21, 2020 Share Posted November 21, 2020 13 hours ago, Hmmmm said: For clarity comment was about HQ This bit. I don't understand why hmmm would feel the need to clarify this. I would think that most people on here were already aware the howard in question was HQ as hmmm so helpfully adds. It wouldn't be the first time today even that I have got the wrong end of the stick but it seemed to me that hmmm was some government bod bringing that particular post of yours to some other government bods attention. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hmmmm Posted November 21, 2020 Share Posted November 21, 2020 13 hours ago, Scotty said: Don’t want to speak out of turn, BUT, we need Rachael more than she needs us. (For sure). I was clarifying it for Scotty, if you read the thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wrighty Posted November 21, 2020 Share Posted November 21, 2020 14 minutes ago, the stinking enigma said: This bit. I don't understand why hmmm would feel the need to clarify this. I would think that most people on here were already aware the howard in question was HQ as hmmm so helpfully adds. It wouldn't be the first time today even that I have got the wrong end of the stick but it seemed to me that hmmm was some government bod bringing that particular post of yours to some other government bods attention. Hmmm’s post could have been interpreted as accusing Rachel of pomposity - it’s what I thought on first reading. He/she then clarified that Howard was the target. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the stinking enigma Posted November 21, 2020 Share Posted November 21, 2020 Which howard did scotty think it was? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the stinking enigma Posted November 21, 2020 Share Posted November 21, 2020 Ah ok, I sort of get it now, sorry carry on 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barlow Posted November 21, 2020 Share Posted November 21, 2020 4 hours ago, Holte End said: You are Dave Shredder Ashford and I claim my five pounds. I never trust someone who always says " I stand to be corrected`' in answering questions. I realise it is a space filler but the phrase that bites my bollox is "to be honest". It suggests that everything else without that proviso isn't honest. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Holte End Posted November 21, 2020 Share Posted November 21, 2020 5 hours ago, Barlow said: I realise it is a space filler but the phrase that bites my bollox is "to be honest". It suggests that everything else without that proviso isn't honest. Both with Mr Qualye's always saying " To the best of my knowledge" and Mr Ashford's " I stand to be corrected" are really so that they can't be accused of misleading Tynwald, which in essences is what they are really doing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augustus Posted November 21, 2020 Share Posted November 21, 2020 11 hours ago, PaulJ said: I don't Another misogynist in da house. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barlow Posted November 21, 2020 Share Posted November 21, 2020 (edited) Ashford just doesn't get it (although of course I'm sure he does...) in that he is making out the fuss to be all about the content of the letter, rather than his producing and reading out the letter in the way he did. Juan Turner doesn't do himself any favours in criticising it being called 'the anonymous letter'. We all know it wasn't 'anonymous'. it was just that the person's name wasn't divulged. The point here is that under the circumstances a letter was used and how it was used, in the first place Edited to add: Oh.....and then promptly destroyed. Edited November 21, 2020 by Barlow 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Banker Posted November 21, 2020 Share Posted November 21, 2020 13 minutes ago, Barlow said: Ashford just doesn't get it (although of course I'm sure he does...) in that he is making out the fuss to be all about the content of the letter, rather than his producing and reading out the letter in the way he did. Juan Turner doesn't do himself any favours in criticising it being called 'the anonymous letter'. We all know it wasn't 'anonymous'. it was just that the person's name wasn't divulged. The point here is that under the circumstances a letter was used how it was, in the first place Well we don’t know it wasn’t anonymous or made up by cabinet office as it’s been destroyed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barlow Posted November 21, 2020 Share Posted November 21, 2020 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Banker said: Well we don’t know it wasn’t anonymous or made up by cabinet office as it’s been destroyed Yep, and that is a point that Ashford so smugly avoids, and when it is suggested he disparages. As if he would do such a thing. Well, anyone who produces a letter at a press briefing and relies on it so much to make a point (obviously) and then unilaterally declares the letter has had it's use and destroys it.....is potentially capable of anything. Edited November 21, 2020 by Barlow 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Posted November 21, 2020 Share Posted November 21, 2020 Once you have eaten your meal, you wash the plate. Simple as that. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barlow Posted November 21, 2020 Share Posted November 21, 2020 2 minutes ago, Scotty said: Once you have eaten your meal, you wash the plate. Simple as that. Nice one Scotty! You're good! There's a euphemism there somewhere, like the dog eating the homework? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.