Terminology

[wraymond]

My apologies first, no desire to start a fire!
Is it possible that references to 'usual suspects' and other not so vague oblique identifications could be avoided? That's uncomfortably close to being disrespectful of members and is surely covered in Rules? If it isn't, maybe it ought to be.

Some of us, not necessarily to blame, are unsure of being complicit and if there are cautions to be levied the PM route is just a bit less personal whilst being very personal in effect. A simple mention of a particular rule being broken is sufficient to make a point, we can all read and correctly apportion responsibility. Again, my apologies at the end so there's no doubt!

[Gate Keeper]

I found “the usual suspects” comment to be witty and harmless. Although I wasn’t on the receiving end of it, it helps to have a sense of humour with these things and not take it too seriously. Have a fabulous day

[stocktake]

Regardless of the "usual subjects" some of which I have nothing but admiration for regarding their debating skills, explanations and their opinions, I found the thread to be a great source of information, sadly missing it.

[gnu]

An anonymous source told me the usual suspects include you know who.

[steve-45]

Originally Posted by gnu

An anonymous source told me the usual suspects include you know who.

Who ?? The WORLD HEALTH ORGANISATION.

[WillyHeckaslike]

Originally Posted by wraymond

My apologies first, no desire to start a fire! Is it possible that references to 'usual suspects' and other not so vague oblique identifications could be avoided? That's uncomfortably close to being disrespectful of members and is surely covered in Rules? If it isn't, maybe it ought to be. Some of us, not necessarily to blame, are unsure of being complicit and if there are cautions to be levied the PM route is just a bit less personal whilst being very personal in effect. A simple mention of a particular rule being broken is sufficient to make a point, we can all read and correctly apportion responsibility. Again, my apologies at the end so there's no doubt!

You must be doing something right Raymond if you think that you might only be a suspect. Lol.

[wraymond]

Originally Posted by gnu

An anonymous source told me the usual suspects include you know who.

Thanks for highlighting the root of the thing Michael! Two oblique references for the price of one! Not all of us do know who, and Anon lacks the courage of their convictions. If I even thought badly of anything I would not accuse and run away. We all deserve better than childish whisperings.

[marinabrian]

Who knew, that watchamacallhim, thought that thingumeebob would have said anything to hoojumewhatsit that upset them??

Wonders will never cease

[clf]

Originally Posted by marinabrian

Who knew, that watchamacallhim, thought that thingumeebob would have said anything to hoojumewhatsit that upset them??

Wonders will never cease

Jeez, I am confused, I thought it was yer man that was upset.......

Sent from my SM-A600FN using Tapatalk

[wraymond]

Originally Posted by WillyHeckaslike

You must be doing something right Raymond if you think that you might only be a suspect. Lol.

I absolutely get that WillyH! I don't give a damn what people think of me so the inner workings of on-line pretend diplomacy leaves me cold. I'm honest and genuine and if people can't be frank, nay, even blunt, then it's a poor show.

But sideline swivel eyed sarcasm that is shotgun splatter is poison to a well-mannered club. These terms are just plain wrong, so maybe I'm in the wrong place. People may use non-speak language but they must be aware of the wider audience. An online cobblering is just out of order - there is an excellent alternative that everyone is aware of.

Righty, I'm out of here now, off to our daugther's for a bottle or two. Of course, we'll be in the kitchen while she and her 150% Irishman has the best seat in the house in the lounge with the assorted Leprechauns in various obscene poses are proudly displayed every time we go there. Nighty night.