Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Miss Vicky
No. You argued that I should have understood your statements to be joking because of your use of emoticons. So I used that particular quote - which is followed by the laughing emoticon - to show why I might interpret your words as being anything but joking. And if your statement truly wasn't a joke, then why follow it with a  ?
The word "can" is the present tense form of the word that means "to be able to" and thus refers to now. And if Stevie can't sing now, then she can't sing at all. "Used to be able to" doesn't cut it in my book.
Wrong again. I simply stated that I don't care what you think and you took offense to that and interpreted it as an attack. |
Seriously?
I told you I followed it with a laughie because I thought you were joking.
Which I said already.
Nice try on the grammar, but no.
No I didn't.
To wit, I said "Wow, you're totally aggressive right now for no apparent reason. I mean,
not that I mind or anything, just noticing with amusement."
Again, it's like you didn't read what I said.
Are you the one who said even though you're a writer, you don't read that much? Because your justifications for what you say aren't related to what I wrote. You just got really aggressive for reasons that you made up. And you keep making them up. It's quite amazing at this point. It's like talking to a brick wall. A really rude, illogical brick wall.
A brick wall who will never get it.
A brick wall who gets mad when people say Stevie can sing.
A brick wall who takes offense when someone comments on her sadism.