Undisputedtruth

ladida Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Who gives a @#$%&. Only people with low self esteem.

I like the bit where it boots in under eight seconds although my own system boots in 18 seconds. Not sure I would pay extra to shave ten seconds off the boot time. But I have also heard that it was very buggy, particularly for the Intel i7 processors.

I never do predictions in football because there are so many variables. Yes I have expectations but they are not the same as predictions. I don't have a crystal ball. It's for the same reason why I don't go to betting shops. @Otta, is there a law that I should answer stupid questions? You answered one of my questions with a question as you knew I hit it on the nail. Just how long will you keep up your personal vendetta?

Good question. Rumour has it that Microsoft is selling an upgrade version for $39.99. What was your take on Windows 8, right-click?

Otta Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > She was saying that you're a troll UDT, keep up. > > Going back a step, what I was asking UDT is, being > as you think I know nothing about footballo, does > that mean that all of my views about anything are > automatically dismissed by you, or just my views > on football. > > Secondly, is there a UDT Football Exam that we can > sit, in order to prove our worth in a discussion > about this deeply complex subject? Otta, no amount of bullying or misrepresentation is going to make me accept your poorly thought out views on football. It's my right if I choose what to accept. Get over it.

Otta Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > "Judging by your knee jerk analysis, lack of > football knowledge and sheer stupidity, why would > I take your views seriously?" > > So if you don't think a person's football > knowledge is up to your high standards, you write > them off as a person who's views are not worth > taking seriously? I respect Jah Lush posts when he talks about football from a footballing angle. You're unable to do so. Can you see the difference? It has nothing to do with matching up to my high standards. You only trying to misrepresent the situation because you don't like me. That isn't my problem. It's yours and you really need to get over your lack of self-esteem.

TillieTrotter Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Boys, boys.....you're being played like a fiddle > here. Bloody funny though. I'm not too concern. It's usually the same few individuals who feel they have a god given right to dictate what can be said on a forum.

Otta Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > "Judging by your knee jerk analysis, lack of > football knowledge and sheer stupidity, why would > I take your views seriously?" > > So if you don't think a person's football > knowledge is up to your high standards, you write > them off as a person who's views are not worth > taking seriously? Otta, I draw the line with football arguments over your nonsense that everyone hates Liverpool.

StraferJack Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > speaking of Messrs Brown and Co, the email in this > link could be fairly explosive, no? > > http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2012/07/03/1070001 > /mr-tucker-stated-that-it-did-not-always-need-to-b > e-the-case-that-we-appeared-as-high-as-we-have-rec > ently/ I think it could be explosive but not in terms of Gordon Brown connection. Obviously Whitehall was concern about the LIBOR rate and suspicious of Barclays's role in the figure. I think there's more information to come. Since Barclays has been ound guilted in manipulating the LIBOR rate then surely people who are paying mortgages are entitled to a refund of extra interest paid.

Other individuals don't have a problem with me and have had private messages giving support after seeing abuses targetted towards me. I think the real issue is low self-esteem for people like Bob and co. Bob didn't exactly appeared in this thread to talk about in-depth football matters unless I'm seriously mistaken. Besides what gives him the right to tell me who I am or not? If he feels inadequate then seek treatment. I don't have any issues with people who are better than me on certain subjects. Why would I?

StraferJack Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > "in fact I'm staggered that the Glaxo story hasn't > generated more commentary. > It's far more shocking, though the fine is > gargantuan." > > It is shocking but I think Joe Public has had a > long history of Big Pharma pulling numbers like > that and when they get caught they tend to pay a > price > > I think with banks there is a sense that not only > does Joe Public not know the half of it, but that > banks continue to be mollycoddles and yet even so, > teh worst is yet to come. And things like > Libor-fixing looks a BIT like a scraggly, skinny > dude on horseback Probably due to the fact it was related to anti-depressants.

*Bob* Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Oh I see.. You run into the room of strangers, > you repeatedly tell them all how brilliant you are > in the most ridiculous manner (as well as how > stupid they are), then when they all tell you > you're a tit - you play the victim? > > > Wake up and smell the coffee, man! > > > It's you. Take responsibility for the reaction YOU > illicit in others. As if I'm going to listen to a bunch of imbalance people. I say get over your low self-esteem issues as I much rather want to talk about football. Something that is sorely lacking in your posts. Anyway, no amount of bullying will force me off the forum.

Bob, you're confusing lack of social interaction with my disdain for certain individuals. Besides, your behaviour along with Otta and EP amounts to bullying. The root cause of bullying is lack of self-esteem. I'm afraid the problem isn't me.

*Bob* Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Let me know when you've finished sucking yourself > off again, UDT - and I'll fetch you a tissue. I really feel sorry for you Bob. You must have led an inadequate life. Not having the means to do things for yourself. People not taking you seriously because you talk rubbish all the time.

It seems you've done a bit of selective reading as clearly you haven't acknowledged the first sentence - "Sympathy is an extension of empathic concern".

Thanks EP, but the wikipedia definition is clear on this matter: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sympathy "Sympathy is an extension of empathic concern, or the perception, understanding, and reaction to the distress or need of another human being.[1] This empathic concern is driven by a switch in viewpoint, from a personal perspective to the perspective of another group or individual who is in need. Empathy and sympathy are often used interchangeably, but the two terms have distinct origins and meanings.[2] Empathy refers to the understanding and sharing of a specific emotional state with another person. Sympathy, however, does not require the sharing of the same emotional state. Instead, sympathy is a concern for the well-being of another. Although sympathy may begin with empathizing with the same emotion another person is feeling, sympathy can be extended to other emotional states.(Isn't this backwards? Isn't sympathy felt and empathy understood but not felt? Reference: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/empathy)[1]"

I don't think better/smarter compliance is the answer. As it seems banks will alway find away around it. What is clear is that these bankers were fraudulent in their behaviour and the 2006 fraud act gives the possibility for prosections in the future. Putting these bankers in jail is the only way forward. If a rioter can be given a stiff sentence for stealing a packet of chewing gum then surely throwing away the key is the right thing to do for these bankers.

Otta Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I openly admit I was never much good at football, > and never cared. I don't think you need to play > the game to understand it though UDT, it's really > not all that complicated. > > My school was a rugby school though, and I was a > regular starter for the first XV, and played at a > pretty good level in to my early 20s, until I > couldn't be bothered anymore. I don't talk like I > know better than anyone else about it though, > because people tend to find that sort of thing > really irritating. I don't think you have a deep understanding of the game. Each time, I present a football argument, it usually transcends to "you hate Liverpool" type conversations. Personally, I never took football all that seriously because I was more on the academic side of things at school. Perhaps I was deluded about my own ability through my top marks for a wide number of subjects! Even then, I was selected for primary and secondary schools' starting eleven. My school also did rugby but as a eleven year old I didn't consider rugby as a proper sport. I couldn't care less about the game and refuse to watch the game on tv. I've also enjoyed playing tennis, squash, cricket and judo while at school. I won the squash ladder in one year. I thought I was really good as a 13 year old until my female coach gave me a proper squash lesson during a game. The only other sport I did after leaving school was kick boxing which gave wonders to your fitness levels.

I'd expect the likes of Hugo, Quids and co defending Bob Diamond as though he was a victim of his own success. And that we should all be grateful for the existence of banks. I see El Pibe has tried deflect attention away from banks. After all he works for one. We hear how the tories gleefully announced reforms for the public sector. Perhap it's time they do so for the banks. Clearly we have an imbalance of banks in relation to our economy and at the expense of other industries. Some of the banks like Barclays pay very little tax because of tax avoidance schemes. So to say that we should be grateful for banks is pure nonsense. They created the deficit through greediness and let us ordinary people like us pick up the consequences.

El Pibe Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > "I have shown empathy for people who are not well > off in the marks & spencer thread but I draw the > line for utter idiots" > > I think you might be mistaking emapthy for > sympathy, or more likely pity. > > A quick question for you UDT, how do you think you > come across to people, what do you think other > people think of you? Sympathy is an extension of empathy. So either way your original argument is pure nonsense. There are some people where I would take their views seriously. There is a big difference between people who I respect and disrespect. I think where you're struggling to come to terms is whether I take your views seriously. And the answer of course is no. Judging by your knee jerk analysis, lack of football knowledge and sheer stupidity, why would I take your views seriously? My behaviour is a reflection of your behaviour. Get it?

Like I said, what you know isn't worth knowing.

It seems your amateur psychology is equally as bad as your football knowledge. I have nothing to fear here. I don't have any issues in working for a female manager and most of them are far better than the male counterparts. Your statement says more about you than me, Otta, with your sexist remark. I have shown empathy for people who are not well off in the marks & spencer thread but I draw the line for utter idiots. I'm very content that what you lot know isn't worth knowing. And what conclusions you come to are most likely flawed in any case.

I suggest you lot get some treatment for your childhood traumas people rather than taking out your anger on me. Anyway, I'm off to do some shopping. *waves bye bye* ETA. Perhaps Dr Sigmund Huguenot, world famous psychologist, can help you lot. Quids recommends him too.

Since when tiddlywinks is proper sport, *Bob*?

I used to wonder if my 22 MBs was fast enough for iplayer each time when the content stuttered. Quite easy to blame the connection for iplayer problems.