I picked up a deeper comprehension of using the argument on contest entries for a disguised attack on Ashton John, based on his first reply. He was not "just pissin' and moaning about nothing" with a "weak argument" as he talked about a one for one contest. Your reply to him was a little stronger than just a debate on the number of contest entries.
A "disguised attack on Ashton John"? Please stop with the histrionics. Your "comprehension" isn't the only thing that's getting deeper around here.
I asked Ashton a simple question in *my* first reply to him, which, to my bewilderment, he turned into me defending Hawthorne. (He must have that "deeper comprehension" thing, too, having read something into my post that simply was not there.)
My second response was a little stronger, yes -- a known debate tactic -- in an attempt to draw an answer out of him after he ducked it the first time with his bizarre "well no surprise once again when something negative is said about the thorne somebody steps up to defend" comment.
Ashton John can defend himself
Yeah, he can -- where is he?
but it was an automatic response from this "retired school teacher" to break up your bullying tactics.
What a pile of crap that is, Dan. You didn't read the whole thread the first time through what with your haste to take a shot at me; now, to save face, you say that you did so to "break up [my] bullying tactics".
What subject did you teach, Dan -- Revisionist History?