Hutch in the 1911 Census?

[babybird67]

Finally, I have not heard a word from the administrators. I take the liberty to interpret this as a clearance from the allegations made by Babybird.”

Fisherman

that sounds about right.

You wouldn't ascribe it to the mods just being busy having lives and doing important things would you?

The standard of evidence that is acceptable to you obviously leads you to conclude what you do, Fish, unfortunately. As in the Toppy/Hutch question, believing something or saying it repeatedly over and over does not make it true.

I did not make allegations Fish. You made allegations that i had fabricated what you said, even when, quite clearly, time and time again, i quoted you verbatim.

That was attacking my character. I admit i am new here, but anyone who has spoken to me in the chat room will hopefully have seen that i am a happy, honest, outgoing person...i have no interest in fabricating anything, nor do i care for baseless aspersions cast about me on a public message board. I could quite easily have accused you of fabrication in the saga of Leander and his Multi-coloured Dream-report, but i did not...i ascribed your posts to honest mistake. You did not afford me the same respect. Therefore you no longer have mine.

I asked you for an apology. Anyone with any moral fibre would have offered one, without having to be instructed to offer one by the Admin here. I tend to do the right thing without having to be told by someone else what the right thing is...i dont have many qualities, but introspection with a view to improving myself and doing the right thing is one of them. I think it's important. I think everyone should do it. But sadly some people can't be taught and don't know right from wrong, and they are hopeless cases as far as progress is concerned.

So as this thread goes leandering on...ooops i mean MEandering on...and on and on...please refrain from seeing silence as "victory" in the moderation stakes; it's sad and merely shows that you have no moral compass whatsoever. or what you should do would be perfectly clear to you, as it must be to anybody reading this debacle of a thread.

Oh, and please stop using my terminology and trying to suddenly argue that it is everyone else who is illogical whilst you are the pinnacle of reason. There is no rhyme nor no reason in any of your postings which flail wildly between Toppy being variously spoken of as possibly, probably, very probably or definitely Hutch...i'm surprised you have a handle at all on what you do actually think...i think your brain must be like a pinball machine with the ball clanging randomly on various parts of it, lighting up each different theory as it strikes you. Very odd indeed.

[Crystal]

Breaking News! Fisherman Returns To Thread!!!

Why Fish?

What do you hope to achieve?

Do you really imagine that everybody who happens to disagree with you is your enemy?

Have you ever considered that you might have lost perspective here a little?

Fish

I don't think many people like being misrepresented: and that's putting it nicely.

And that is what you have done: repetitively, to those disagreeing with you on this thread. Your response to complaints by other posters about your attitude is to say you'll apologise - except you never do.

If other posters decide they don't want to argue with you on your terms: why then, Fisherman, back you come with more combative nonsense, trying to provoke them into another round.

Your credibility is in grave doubt: and entirely at your own doing.

Perhaps if you had a little more respect for people they might take you more seriously.

Now, no doubt you will come back at me with yet more hostile drivel..but sadly, I won't see it.

I'm putting you on 'ignore'.

Bye Fish.

[DVV]

It is a stupid thing to say, if you´ll forgive me, David.

I forgive you, Fish,

and I even hope you will recover soon.
For everyone can read your posts and see the obvious unlikeness between Leander's expression and yours.

Amitiés,
David

[Ben]

Oh my...

What the....?

It's not possible. Not again.

Fisherman, a handful of us were having a few lighthearted bets and guesses as to how long you'd be able to resist the temptation to return to the thread, despite the number of times you've told us "This is my last post" or expressions to that effect. The fact that you're back already is obsessive even by your standards. If you're sick of us all, and don't want to have any further dealings with us and all the rest of it, don't read the thread. Simple. But if you don't have the self-discipline to avoid reading the thread, don't keep making "I'm leaving" swansongs.

It was not, I´m afraid, Ben. And I hope you will leave Crystal to answer for herself in the future.

Her meaning was so obvious that I didn't even need to consult her first.

When Crystal expressed her intention to post "what (Leander) said" in "due course", she was referring of course to the translation that she had earlier promised to divulge with us. This is obvious, and true to my delighted expectation, she did precisely as she promised and provided a translation, by a Swedish friend of hers, of "what (Leander) said" earlier this morning. She certainly wasn't talking about a phonecall, since you can hardly "post" a "phonecall". Crystal was clearly joking when she mentioned that she had Leander on the phone - that, too, is as obvious as it is innocent. She spoke of mud-wrestling with Babybird, and here's the astonishing thing - she wasn't serious about that either. Does that mean that both of them were fibbing vixens for duping us into believing they did?

She expressed an intention to post what he said, not her friend. Her friend was merely the translator, and not the source of the observations themselves. Accusing people of lying on the basis of blatent misunderstanding on your part is appalling behaviour.

Interestingly, Leander has subseqentially confirmed my wiews in his own clarifications.

His view didn't need "clarifying", as we learn once again from the recent translation. It was perfectly clear. His stance was neutal and inconclusive, and didn't betray even the vaguest insinuation that he felt that Toppy was "probably" the witness. If the whole probability factor arrived on the scene later, it would not have been a "clarification". It would have been an alteration, and a very marked one.

Is what you say. Phew, David; what do you think he means by telling us that he would be surprised if the signatures proved a non-match?

That isn't worth taking seriously, and Crystal and others have every right to be incredibly sceptical about so drastic an alteration of stance, especially as it contrasts so markedly with his earlier comments.

Did you not notice that he spoke of a matching style, a matching skill level, a matching spreading over the paper AND matching letters?

And then he mentioned the various differences which offset those perceived similarities, at no point suggesting that the similarities outweighed the differences, or vice versa.

Now, give yourselves a fair chance of not having to deal any further with me on this thread

Why would I want to do that? I'd be delighted to "deal with you" any day of the week, as you're perfectly aware. The only thing I find annoying is the regularity with which your "I'm leaving!" swansongs are followed hot on the heels by your swift return a few hours thereafter. If you don't like what we're saying, ignore us. If you're not capable of that, put us on the "ignore", and if you can't bring yourself to do that either, don't bother with the swansong posts. Shouldn't be difficult.

[Sam Flynn]

If you don't like what we're saying, ignore us.

That'd be fine in the scheme of things, Ben, but - without taking sides - there seem to have been more ad hominem arrows fired on this thread than there were at Agincourt. Would that we'd have focused more on the core questions, rather than on semantics and personalities.

[halomanuk]

I am out of this one now for the 1st and last time,it is not productive to the Ripper investigation as it stands and is now becoming pain in the a** for all concerned so enjoy it if you think this really helps things lads and lasses ,i,personally,am going to continue to research the Whitechapel Murderer...enjoy..

(Admin,sort this out please )..

[DVV]

You're both right, Halomanuk and Sam,
but who shoot first ?
How many times have we read replies such as: "You must be blind. Is it glasses or a dog that you need ?", or: "You say so cos you're a fanatic Hutcher (Hutchite?)...", or : "My eyes tell me the truth and I see no need to discuss about experts."

Amitiés,
David

[The Good Michael]

You're both right, Halomanuk and Sam,
but who shoot first ?

Every time I read one of those posts of refutation that drone on past 20 lines of text, I want to shoot the writer, and then myself. I don't want to shoot you because you keep the rugby thread alive.

Mike

[DVV]

That wasn't a post of refutation, Mike.
Yours is good example of what went on here.
In fact, the title of this thread should be: "Come and agree with us".
Tana was marvelous tonight (Dax-Toulon 12-22).
Next week I'll see him playing for the last time.
Tout a une fin, hélas, mon bon Mike - except this thread.

Amitiés,
David

[The Good Michael]

That wasn't a post of refutation, Mike.

No, I wasn't talking about your post. I was talking about the long Fish/Ben battles. Your posts are always short and to the point. A beautiful thing in the Hutchinson world. Let's go IRISH and British Lions.

Cheers,

Mike

Wait! Tana can't be retiring, can he?

[DVV]

I was talking about the long Fish/Ben battles.
Wait! Tana can't be retiring, can he?

Mike,
you should appreciate it, the movie's really great. The more Fish has enemies, the more dangerous he is.
A heavy rain of 10kg posts.
Have you seen how he sends them in the morning, then side steps, go fishing, and comes back more furious ?
As to Tana, yes, he will retire, and next week I'll keep my eyes wide open on him.
But he'll still be our coach.
And he told me that he would be very surprised if Toppy was Hutch. The only doubt he has is about possible family ties in Essex.

Amitiés,
David

[The Good Michael]

But he'll still be our coach.
And he told me that he would be very surprised if Toppy was Hutch. The only doubt he has is about possible family ties in Essex.

Oh, he didn't see the signatures then, eh?

[babybird67]

i have one word for you, Mike....

Oh, he didn't see the signatures then, eh?

Incorrigible!

[Crystal]

I agree with Sam-it is a pity that this thread has degenarated into what amounts to a public brawl: and we can't even claim to be drunk..just disorderly.

Still, it remains true that most firing arrows around here have done so in response to repetitive and unwarranted provocation, most often by Fish, who does appear to consider that personal attack is par for the course in the course of promoting his view.

Of course, there will be those who object to being branded a liar, a 'parrott' or such in public, which seems fair enough to me.

The pity is that these exchanges have rendered further debate on this thread difficult to achieve with any reasonable detachment.

I, for one, am done. And unlike Fish, I do mean it.

[DVV]

Oh, he didn't see the signatures then, eh?

Tana is omniscient, omnipotent, omnidirectional, Mike.

Amitiés,
David