Originally Posted by caz
Your loss, not mine or Keith's, or all the others in the know. But I rather hope Keith is not reading along as your posts are becoming just a trifle ill-mannered in your desire to see dishonesty or incompetence whenever a potential challenge crops up to views you hold dear.
For someone who criticises me (wrongly!) for not reading her posts, you don't seem be reading mine properly. There is nothing ill-mannered whatsoever in me saying that I don't accept that you have any proof
that the diary came out of Battlecrease.
Such a statement does not imply dishonesty or incompetence in anyone.
As far as I am aware, Keith Skinner has never claimed to have any proof that the diary came out of Battlecrease. What you said on this forum was no more than that he finds the evidence that it does so "compelling". That being his personal opinion is fine but it does not amount to proof of anything.
Keith Skinner is perfectly entitled to his opinion (as are you) but what is very odd is that you seem to think that because Keith Skinner believes something then I must believe it too, even without knowing what his opinion is based on. That is utterly ridiculous and I am 100% certain that there is no way that Keith Skinner would ever hold such a bizarre view.
The irony of the situation is that it is your suggestion that I am accusing either him or you of dishonesty or incompetence which is very ill-mannered and is something that should never have been said.
Further, there are no views in relation to the diary that I "hold dear". I base all my thoughts and conclusions on the available evidence.