The Bobcat Nation

Okay Bac, don't rub it in. Let it go. Kats stepped up to the plate. PLEASE let's not reopen that issue (although it was a rather interesting case-study on correctness and integrity in our society).

GrizinWashington wrote:Okay Bac, don't rub it in. Let it go. Kats stepped up to the plate. PLEASE let's not reopen that issue (although it was a rather interesting case-study on correctness and integrity in our society).

Or, if you look at it from another angle, it was yet another case-study on one's inability to verbalize (in typing) an agreement that they authored themselves.

lifeloyalsigmsu wrote:

GrizinWashington wrote:Okay Bac, don't rub it in. Let it go. Kats stepped up to the plate. PLEASE let's not reopen that issue (although it was a rather interesting case-study on correctness and integrity in our society).

Or, if you look at it from another angle, it was yet another case-study on one's inability to verbalize (in typing) an agreement that they authored themselves.

That's where the correctness part comes in loyal. Am I missing something?????? Please spell it out for me since you cats are ooohhhh so much smarter than us Griz. Or, then again, maybe not based on your posts.

GrizinWashington wrote:

lifeloyalsigmsu wrote:

GrizinWashington wrote:Okay Bac, don't rub it in. Let it go. Kats stepped up to the plate. PLEASE let's not reopen that issue (although it was a rather interesting case-study on correctness and integrity in our society).

Or, if you look at it from another angle, it was yet another case-study on one's inability to verbalize (in typing) an agreement that they authored themselves.

That's where the correctness part comes in loyal. Am I missing something?????? Please spell it out for me since you cats are ooohhhh so much smarter than us Griz. Or, then again, maybe not based on your posts.

i posted the actual bet in another thread GW but if you are two lazy to actually look it up, what was typed, and read it for yourself, then i wont do you the favor of posting it for you, but i doubt you will be reading it.

feel free to continue on with your delusions of grandur...

At first, this seemed along the same line as when adults let kids beat them at say, basketball, because they obviously aren't as physically capable to play the sport as an adult. Then I realized that isn't really the case because GOKATS had to let Scats win because Scats is simply too ignorant to play the game correctly. Don't get me started on the whining...wow.

Anyway, glad it's over. Definitely learned a little about Scats' personality on this one. That's one Griz fan I wouldn't be caught dead having a drink with.

GrizinWashington wrote: Am I missing something??????

Yes

Hell's Bells wrote:

GrizinWashington wrote:

lifeloyalsigmsu wrote:

GrizinWashington wrote:Okay Bac, don't rub it in. Let it go. Kats stepped up to the plate. PLEASE let's not reopen that issue (although it was a rather interesting case-study on correctness and integrity in our society).

Or, if you look at it from another angle, it was yet another case-study on one's inability to verbalize (in typing) an agreement that they authored themselves.

That's where the correctness part comes in loyal. Am I missing something?????? Please spell it out for me since you cats are ooohhhh so much smarter than us Griz. Or, then again, maybe not based on your posts.

i posted the actual bet in another thread GW but if you are two lazy to actually look it up, what was typed, and read it for yourself, then i wont do you the favor of posting it for you, but i doubt you will be reading it.

feel free to continue on with your delusions of grandur...

Hells, I've read the entire thread. And I agree 100% with you: the bet was backa--wards and completely incorrect as written. Which is why I said that the thing was a study in correctness as well as integrity. Perhaps I would have been more clear if I said it was a studyin "incorrectness". I believe that Scats was just as much to blame as Kats. Scats was incorrect in his bet, there were questions raised concerning integrity, and together I thought those things were interesting.

GrizinWashington wrote:

Hell's Bells wrote:

GrizinWashington wrote:

lifeloyalsigmsu wrote:

GrizinWashington wrote:Okay Bac, don't rub it in. Let it go. Kats stepped up to the plate. PLEASE let's not reopen that issue (although it was a rather interesting case-study on correctness and integrity in our society).

Or, if you look at it from another angle, it was yet another case-study on one's inability to verbalize (in typing) an agreement that they authored themselves.

That's where the correctness part comes in loyal. Am I missing something?????? Please spell it out for me since you cats are ooohhhh so much smarter than us Griz. Or, then again, maybe not based on your posts.

i posted the actual bet in another thread GW but if you are two lazy to actually look it up, what was typed, and read it for yourself, then i wont do you the favor of posting it for you, but i doubt you will be reading it.

feel free to continue on with your delusions of grandur...

Hells, I've read the entire thread. And I agree 100% with you: the bet was backa--wards and completely incorrect as written. Which is why I said that the thing was a study in correctness as well as integrity. Perhaps I would have been more clear if I said it was a studyin "incorrectness". I believe that Scats was just as much to blame as Kats. Scats was incorrect in his bet, there were questions raised concerning integrity, and together I thought those things were interesting.

ok cool now that i know we totally agree with this then it can also be said that kats was the more honest of the two by finally giving in to scats after having that same damned thread up with picures of weasels and a ferrit for how long now...3 weeks(?)

No arguments, my friend. No arguments.

Always more than one way to skin a cat.

jagur1 wrote:Always more than one way to skin a cat.

Insightful.......good to see you that you can correctly spell "thief" in your sig line.

Have we not been all over this before?