On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 10:11:42 -0000, "Fran" 
wrote:

>
>"John Anderton"  wrote in message 
>news:ds68e55tshkr1gfb5sl9h4rfvj7opgpoed@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 09:30:59 -0000, "Fran" 
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"John Anderton"  wrote in 
>>>message
>>>news:4q38e5t08nd3pk6u4fjbk7ujida17if6eg@4ax.com...
>>>> On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 06:41:52 GMT, petrolcan 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Let's not forget that fran has yet to condemn any of spacker's
>>>>>behaviour.
>>>>>
>>>> Well, he called him "a pain" once, doesn't that count ? :-)
>>>>
>>>
>>>I have condemned things he did, but let's not allow facts to get in the 
>>>way
>>>of a good insult.
>>>
>> Fran, why should I believe you ? I've read lots of your posts and the
>> one where you called Spacker "a pain" stood out purely because it was
>> so unusual. You normally ignored his bad behaviour or joined in with
>> his attacks on those you appear to dislike.
>
>I neither dislike or like anyone here, as I have said preciously. I like or 
>dislike their displayed behaviour.

OK, I'll re-phrase :

You normally ignored Spacker's bad behaviour or joined in with his
attacks on those whose behaviour you appear to dislike.

Correct ?

>> It's possible that somewhere there are posts where you condemn
>> Spacker's lies but you can't seem to bring yourself to post links to
>> them or quotes from them so my conclusion is that they probably don't
>> exist,
>>
>
>With all due respect, you're the one who made the claim. 

No, I didn't. Read what's quoted above. Petrolcan made the claim.

I claimed you called him "a pain" once.

>So I think the onus 
>is on you. 

Tell you what, I'll root out the id of the message where you called
him "a pain" if you'll post the id of one where you condemned his
behaviour.

After you -

Cheers,

John