>>Oh, like I guess you walk around with bandy legs going, "Aaaright. Mad for it"
>
>Not with bandy legs. Where do you get that from?

Obviously from the stereotypical, swaggering, bandy-legged manks that were all over the British music industry 10 years ago and now, mercifully, keep a low profile or have grown up.
>
>>>Nope. I would say Charles is a lot clearer than a Scouser.
>>Maybe so - but not me.
>
>Posh Scouser, 'eh?

One could say that.

>
>>Don't. But I'm flattered that you follow my threds so avidly.
>
>I follow your "threads" when I have a moment; just to keep tabs on you ;)
>
>>It's at the end of the message and so has no bearing on the sense of the message.
>
>True, but it could leave the reader wondering whether you signed off with a typo.

Not for those who avidly follow my threads and take note of such things. Yeah, and I often miss the "a" key and hit the apostrophe by mistake.

>
>>I put in "'" in place of the "a" so it saves me nothing. It's short for "I would appreciate it" and is intended to sound like natural speech, like "'anks"
>
>Maybe to you, but not to a "non-anglophone".

Doesn't matter. The question's done with by then;.
>
>>No, of course not, but I've heard them speak enough. "One was distracted at the time" can only mean "I ..."
>
>In your world, maybe.

So where is your world that you've not heard Her Majesty speak before?

>
>>Like how did "we" dismiss this?
>

>It doesn't take much. You are a very touchy guy. Odd?

Not with anyone else here. Only you go out of your way to wind me up.

>
>>I only react to your snide little Mank jibes.
>
>Oooh. We are sensitive, aren't we?
>
>>Never a word of encouragement, agreement - only contention with what I say.
>
>That's it! I just realised why you get involved in just about every thread. You like being stroked.

Not nearly every thread but many (like you said, you're keeping tabs on me). I do it for the socialisation, not being in an office of lively personalities, because I'm interested in other people, and I'd like to think that I'm with friends here. And you know what I mean: if you want tod discuss or contend a point of coding/syntax/view on the world - whatever, but all you do is gainsay everything I say.

>
>>Yes but that one message is negative like all the others.
>
>Well, I don't think my original message was negative; I merely made reference to your use of Queen's English for Queen's Sake. Take it or leave it.

Yes but the thread was not on the subject of English. So why did you have to open your referencing gob?
>
>>>>Now EFF OFF!
>>>I wish you would.
>>Well stop writing to me then, gobshite.
>
>You are quite a nasty piece of work when riled, aren't you? If you are ever up this neck of the woods, feel free to look me up. I would be interested in you choice of words when you are not hiding behind your firewall ;)

Not nasty with anyone. I tend to avoid the slanging matches that go on this thread but you come begging for it. And I take your last comment to mean would I come outside your office offering fisticuffs - that may be your style. I don't go for braggadocio