@CalabrianQueen said:

@FormerlyKnownAs said:

@Knixon said:

@FormerlyKnownAs said:

Starting to seem like one of the longer ones. Can't help but think about "Cuoco" and her countdown-clock marriage to "Sweeting". (Of course, the record to beat still belongs to "Britney"-and-"Jason": 55 Hours.)

Around here, seems like you should be careful what you put in "quotes." At least to some people that seems to be some kind of bizarre "dog whistle."

Considering the limited text-enhancement options (no offense Team Travis) on this site, surely by now most(?) posters must realize that all their fellow posters are doing by using (““) is trying to punch-up their writing a tad.

Still, expect there will always a few who read all such posts with a "hammer in hand".

This site has an italic and bold feature, that aren't at all difficult to use.

Yes. I know. I used them liberally. --BUT I NEED MORE! Visual "upticks" can camouflage a multitude of writing sins.

@CalabrianQueen said:

Because that's not what you did , Sherlock. I didn't read your mind or misrepresent anything, I responded to what you wrote.In the middle of your Roseanne dissertation you went off on barely related tangent harping on what "most women" do then added your "quotes" around key terms . One doesn't need clairvoyance to see intent, no matter how much you whine and deny what's clear as day.

And it's no one's fault you can't get through so much as four lines without saying something ridiculous, or showing us the "tells" that make you a uniquely ignorant person.

Your last paragraph made me laugh the most, you just can't help yourself. You need a radio show or a podcast so you can spout your crazy to the like-minded and equally simple-minded.

Your inexperience continues to display itself. One day maybe you'll understand. Maybe. But I wouldn't take any bets on it. You still don't understand that lots of people in the world - probably over half, really, based just on age - have already done, experienced, etc at least as much as you have. Including me. But you haven't done, experienced, etc as much as THEY have. Including me. Your insistence that you can somehow teach over the half the world - including me - lessons about life etc, is.... well, "precious" seems the most appropriate term.

@Knixon said:

@CalabrianQueen said:

Because that's not what you did , Sherlock. I didn't read your mind or misrepresent anything, I responded to what you wrote.In the middle of your Roseanne dissertation you went off on a barely related tangent harping on what "most women" do then added your "quotes" around key terms . One doesn't need clairvoyance to see intent, no matter how much you whine and deny what's clear as day.

And it's no ones fault you can't get through so much as four lines without saying something ridiculous, or showing us the "tells" that make you a uniquely ignorant person.

Your last paragraph made me laugh the most, you just can't help yourself. You need a radio show or a podcast so you can spout your crazy to the like-minded and equally simple-minded.

Your inexperience continues to display itself. One day maybe you'll understand. Maybe. But I wouldn't take any bets on it. You still don't understand that lots of people in the world - probably over half, really, based just on age - have already done, experienced, etc at least as much as you have. Including me. But you haven't done, experienced, etc as much as THEY have. Including me. Your insistence that you can somehow teach over the half the world - including me - lessons about life etc, is.... well, "precious" seems the most appropriate term.

Translation: "I'm old so I'm Right"

The only thing you have more "experience" in is wetting your pants.