Quote:
Originally Posted by earlywynnfan
Sometimes I wonder if you read what you write. You said this: "That's a common retort any time PSA or JSA are questioned - the sort of response that allows them to remain infallible to many on this board."
Now you say the above?? OK, you didn't claim anyone said they were infallible, you just said they remain infallible to many. Isn't this splitting hairs? If you don't claim anyone says they are infallible, can you please explain who these "many on this board" are???
Ken
|
And sometimes I wonder if you understand English. You got one thing correct - I did not state that anyone here has claimed that a TPA is infallible. 'Claiming' is active, while "they remain infallible" is passive. If you can't understand what I wrote, then scratch your head and move on. And if you want to talk about splitting hairs, concentrating on the word "infallible" as the most important part of a discussion is about as hair-spitting as you can get.
I probably should have used something less caustic than "infallible", but based on the responses by yourself, Steve, and Eskimo, I'm certain that each of you would have found another word to key on in order to divert the discussion away from the ridiculous "band wagon" comment that I was responding to.