Chelsea play at home midweek at least once a fortnight, how many times
are you saying they do play midweek every fortnight?

Odd way of phrasing it! Is assume you mean 'at home' too?

Of course I mean that. You really ought to give up the student union debating
tactics and get into the adult world where certain phrases are omitted for
obvious brevity without altering the meaning of the phrase concerned.


Anyway, less than one.


I disagree, although in a particular month it may be less than one but overall,
it is an average of once a fortnight.

Oh, and BTW, if was you that suggested you could not leave your home,
not me.

Exactly, and I stand by that. Why do you say this is untrue?

Because it is not true, it is a lie. You can leave your home, you choose
not to.

Don't be so silly: we were writing in the context of leaving home to go to work
- or have you forgotten how this thread originated? In a previous message I had
also made it clear that, of course, I could walk up and down my street and
watch the football crowds, but that is hardly income-generating (or even
meaningful social) activity.

Are you telling me that I CAN drive or catch a bus from where I live
when Chelsea play at home?

Not at all, I am simply saying what you said was untrue.

Your lack of logic fails me.

You say something false, you never said you cannot catch a bus or drive
(also only before and after the game), you can walk a bit further to
other bus routes/tube lines.

Don't be so silly.

I have already stated, several times, that I cannot leave my home
(insert the words "for any meaningful purpose" if that makes you feel
better, bt that must be a pretty obvious given) and yet you still
maintain that this is a lie. Why do you say it is a lie?

You should add, without mixing with the proles and making too much
effort.

Now you are just being silly: it is so obvious in the context of this thread
that I was writing about disruption of normal everyday activity, and being
unable to travel from my home and "being unable to leave my home" are semantic
differences that may earn you brownie points in a student union debating
competition but not fit for adult debate.

You stated I "lied often in this thread already" - you have failed to
provide any evidence that I have lied at all, let alone "often".

Err, I have, you are changing your claims about what you said.

No you said I "lied often in this thread already" and have provided no evidence
to support that slur whatsoever.

Often enough you to be unreliable.

You really are being very silly.

Again I ask, again you fail to
answer, how many lies does one need? To me, twice within 24 hours is
often.


"Twice within 24 hours is often" in a context of what, 20 or 30 messages? If
that's the best you can come up with, then your debating skills are very poor
(in my opinion).

But then someone who thinks about 40% of the British population (those who are
against Bush's visit according to a recent poll quoted in this thread) is the
"majority" clearly has dificulty in arithmetical concepts.



Rubbish: it is so obvious that leaving home to do something
meaningful, which obviously involves transport of some sort, that I
did not need to write that. Given that this part of the thread
originated from the possibility of suing the football club for loss of
income from being unable to travel, it is only you who can have failed
to grasp this obvious fact.

Even with your qualifications, it is still untrue.

That is simply nonsense.

You are trying to say
you cannot leave you home (false), you moved the goalposts to you cannot
travel by your preferred mode transport. Those that exagerate claims to
make a point have no point.

It wasn't me who started exaggerating claim in this thread: it was those like
you who were of the view that the "majority" of the population were against
Bush's visit. Clearly you like exaggeration as a rhetorical tool when you use
it, but should anyone else do so, then you accuse them of lying. Nice
consistency of approach.



No: I may have inadvertently left out "mid-week" in my latter
statement, but I wholeheartedly stand by my original assertion that
Chelsea play at home mid-week at least once a fortnight. Perhaps I
should have added "during the football season" and "barring world wars
and nuclear attack" but these are such obvious assumtions that only a
fool would require them to be stated in adult debate.

Even with these qualifiers it is still untrue, hence a lie.


We'll just have to agree to differ then: I live here, I know how often Chelsea
play at home and I know the disruption it causes to my life. I don't really
care whether you believe me or not, but it's been fun debating with you.

Marc.

But then someone who thinks about 40% of the British population (those who
are
against Bush's visit according to a recent poll quoted in this thread) is the
"majority" clearly has dificulty in arithmetical concepts.


I must correct myself before I am accused of "lying" again: substitute "36%"
for "about 40%" in the foregoing.

Marc.