Daily Telecrap at their lowest - Rugby league is not a sport, it's an atrocity

[Karl]

Yeah, a spell-checker.

Moron.

How is a motoring journalist and an assistant editor a spell checker? They fly spell checkers to Germany to drive 5 Series BMW's now do they?

Fool.

 

[Everlovin' Antichrist]

Everlovin i just saw your hidden text. I get in plenty of arguments and fights and get baited all the time, ive got a temper, but there comes a point when u gotta let it go. The longer it goes on the happier the guy is. But if your just sending the bloke rude emails then thats probably not gonna make a difference either way.

You saw it but still don't get it.

First of all, you can't post here when angry, it's a waste of time and you'll just get it shoved up your arse. I never, ever post angry.

Secondly, hanging shit on someone who obviously wants shit hung on them does 2 things; 1. It gives them what they crave and 2. Gives me someone, who craves and deserves it, to hang shit on.

As for him, he'll read it because his ego won't allow him to not read it and if he replies, I'll shove whatever he replies with back at him with more venom than I did in the original email. And he is MUCH more likely to reply to a venemous personal email attack than an email that just simply takes him apart for his complete lack of accuracy in his article.

And why will I do it?

Because it's f**king funny to use someone's ego against them. As you just found out....

 

[Everlovin' Antichrist]

How is a motoring journalist and an assistant editor a spell checker? They fly spell checkers to Germany to drive 5 Series BMW's now do they?

Fool.

So, you know all this about him do you?

How, do you know him, do you stalk him, do you hang on his every word?

Face it, he's a spell-checker.

He's the only bloke at the Telegraph who's job isn't coveted by the copy boys.

Jesus you're dense.

 

[betcats]

You saw it but still don't get it.

First of all, you can't post here when angry, it's a waste of time and you'll just get it shoved up your arse. I never, ever post angry.

Secondly, hanging shit on someone who obviously wants shit hung on them does 2 things; 1. It gives them what they crave and 2. Gives me someone, who craves and deserves it, to hang shit on.

As for him, he'll read it because his ego won't allow him to not read it and if he replies, I'll shove whatever he replies with back at him with more venom than I did in the original email. And he is MUCH more likely to reply to a venemous personal email attack than an email that just simply takes him apart for his complete lack of accuracy in his article.

And why will I do it?

Because it's f**king funny to use someone's ego against them. As you just found out....

Um thats one of the most egotistical posts i've seen on here, get over yourself you're not that smart.

Edit: I still think insulting him is pointless, and i think it pleases you to show everyone how witty and tricky you can be.

 

[Karl]

So, you know all this about him do you?

How, do you know him, do you stalk him, do you hang on his every word?

Face it, he's a spell-checker.

He's the only bloke at the Telegraph who's job isn't coveted by the copy boys.

Jesus you're dense.

Actually, I just Googled his name and all of the articles and reviews he's written were right there.

Who's dense?

 

[Everlovin' Antichrist]

Um thats one of the most egotistical posts i've seen on here, get over yourself you're not that smart.

Never said I was.

But I was apparrently smart enough to get you to post over and over, even though I was hanging shit on you and obviously baiting you, after you posted:

He's trolling you all, hook, line and sinker.

Do you only spot trolling between 9 and 10am?

It was a dreadfully stupid post by the way.

Edit: I still think insulting him is pointless, and i think it pleases you to show everyone how witty and tricky you can be.

Why would I care?

Most of what I say to him won't be posted here. Same as it wasn't when I've had email "spats" with better and more well-known journos than this nuffy. You seem to forget that even journos are people with egos, failings etc...well, most of them.

The end result is that you think everyone should ignore it and show your solidarity with that stance by getting into an argument with someone who is obviously baiting you for a laugh?

Fact is, you're just plain stupid.

 

[Everlovin' Antichrist]

Actually, I just Googled his name and all of the articles and reviews he's written were right there.

Who's dense?

Well, you are, obviously.

He's a spell-checker.

You honestly think that everyone who's name is on an article is written by that person and only that person and no article has any fabrication of any sort in it?

Mate, I have this bridge for sale, going cheap....

 

[age.s]

The muppet who wrote this doesn't care about our reactions or opinions.

Nope.

Being many things, but not ingenuous, a certain response by nettled fans and boosters of the gravest game of all (or whatever this crowd call it) was not unexpected. It was, in truth, a prospect relished.

He cares. He's genuinely looking to hear angry remonstrations from RL fans all over. He's loving it, getting off on pure trolling. Makes me as angry as anyone else but damned if I'm going to give that asshole what he wants.

Like others have said the real issue is that News even allows rubbish like this to be published. Ignore the bastards. Don't just make vague promises but then occasionally click on links or browse the paper that gets delivered to work, make a concious effort to have absolutely nothing to do with their printed material. Treat them like the plague and they'll get the message.

 

[Everlovin' Antichrist]

Hippies.

 

[Karl]

Well, you are, obviously.

He's a spell-checker.

You honestly think that everyone who's name is on an article is written by that person and only that person and no article has any fabrication of any sort in it?

Mate, I have this bridge for sale, going cheap....

In a professional publishing group, the Right of Attribution (as a Moral Right of the Author of a work under the Copyright Act) is taken pretty seriously. You work in publishing and news do you? If you're referring to the re-hashing of press releases under a by-line, that happens, but a quick glance at the car reviews etc by Paul would indicate that's not the case although all of them regurgitate technical specs etc.

For a bloke who says he never posts angry, you sure sound angry and aggressive all the time by the way.

 

[betcats]

Never said I was.

But I was apparrently smart enough to get you to post over and over, even though I was hanging shit on you and obviously baiting you, after you posted:



Do you only spot trolling between 9 and 10am?

It was a dreadfully stupid post by the way.



Why would I care?

Most of what I say to him won't be posted here. Same as it wasn't when I've had email "spats" with better and more well-known journos than this nuffy. You seem to forget that even journos are people with egos, failings etc...well, most of them.

The end result is that you think everyone should ignore it and show your solidarity with that stance by getting into an argument with someone who is obviously baiting you for a laugh?

Fact is, you're just plain stupid.

Well like i said i have a temper. As for the bold bit i dunno why you would say that,i was just calling the guy a muppet.

You get your kicks trading insulting emails with a spellchecker who is supposed to be an idiot and talking circles around people on a forum. You even posted one of the emails to show how clever you are. I may be plain stupid but your life sounds pretty pathetic to me. Good luck with your spats with well known journos.

 

[docbrown]

Pottinger's automatically a hack because he writes for the Daily Telegraph.

Defending him is defending mediocrity.

 

[betcats]

Pottinger's automatically a hack because he writes for the Daily Telegraph.

Defending him is defending mediocrity.

Im not defending him.

 

[docbrown]

In a professional publishing group, the Right of Attribution (as a Moral Right of the Author of a work under the Copyright Act) is taken pretty seriously.

If you've ever worked for a piece of shit rag like Carsguide you'd realise how often writers are just another name for data entry operators.

 

[Karl]

Pottinger's automatically a hack because he writes for the Daily Telegraph.

Defending him is defending mediocrity.

I never said he was a GOOD journalist, just that he wasn't a spell checker. His latest piece is disjointed and badly written. He may have peaked with the original article. That would be pretty sad. It was competent satire, at best.

 

[Canard]

Don't worry Doc, Karl is a Union troll who created an account specifically to come on here and "defend" Paul.

He has been silent for a few days, and then suddenly pops his head up, when this so-called reply was recently posted online by Paul.

His impassioned pleas make me think he is either Paul or a relative.

 

[docbrown]

I never said he was a GOOD journalist, just that he wasn't a spell checker. His latest piece is disjointed and badly written. He may have peaked with the original article. That would be pretty sad. It was competent satire, at best.

Shame it wasn't at best.

 

[Everlovin' Antichrist]

In a professional publishing group, the Right of Attribution (as a Moral Right of the Author of a work under the Copyright Act) is taken pretty seriously. You work in publishing and news do you? If you're referring to the re-hashing of press releases under a by-line, that happens, but a quick glance at the car reviews etc by Paul would indicate that's not the case although all of them regurgitate technical specs etc.

For a bloke who says he never posts angry, you sure sound angry and aggressive all the time by the way.

Paul?

:lol:

And I suppose you work for the Telegraph and can vouch for their integrity?

The bloke's a nobody stuck in a nothing job. This is as famous as he's ever been or will ever be. At least he has the intellectual capacity to understand that.

Stop trying to read as though you have any idea what you're talking about.

You don't.

 

[Everlovin' Antichrist]

Well like i said i have a temper. As for the bold bit i dunno why you would say that,i was just calling the guy a muppet.

You get your kicks trading insulting emails with a spellchecker who is supposed to be an idiot and talking circles around people on a forum. You even posted one of the emails to show how clever you are. I may be plain stupid but your life sounds pretty pathetic to me. Good luck with your spats with well known journos.

May be?

I even said it in the last post, in plain English, yet you still replied with your sooky drivel.

Hitch up your skirt and piss off.

 

[age.s]

Angry RL fans pretty clearly give this guy a raging semi. I'd be amazed if he hadn't read through this thread.