Dr John Dee

From some of what goes on around here I'm not surprised you didn't know there was a code of conduct. It's a thread towards the top on the Melbourne Demons forum page.

No they can't. Read the code of conduct.

Perhaps you should give up the clichés then, Daisy, they're bad for your cogitative health.

Rest assured, Mr Old, the Tweed Valley banana farmers will quickly fill any gaps in the market ... at the usual inflated prices of course.

Are they Kevin Andrews' Sisters?

It's mainly just a couple of people wandering around in an ideological fog. Any sound you hear is them walking into walls from time to time. Thanks for the link.

Now you really are using words that are just a bit too big for you. An ad hominem is a means of attacking or dismissing an argument by some form of attack on the person making the argument. Since you haven't at any stage presented any form of argument, my pointing to the ridiculousness of your efforts at ridicule is hardly ad hominem. It's simple description. As for ad hominems, try your point (ii). I'd use the word irony if there was any chance you'd recognise what that is, but let's just call it hypocrisy. I don't need lectures from you about the nature of this forum. It isn't a public forum, anyway, it's for people who've signed up as members, many of whom pay for the privilege of being such and probably would prefer not to have to put up with the sort of tripe you've been directing at me in some desperate point-scoring exercise that proves nothing other than your failure to understand even the basics of the language you're supposed to be using. About that language, I don't need to twist anything, by the way, your one repeated success is in your ability to tie yourself up in verbal knots. That goes with the territory when you grasp at words that you have no comprehension of. If you think you've got some unfettered right to 'interrupt' a conversation between other members without even bothering to inform yourself of any of the previous discussion, you're even more arrogant than you are ignorant. Make whatever insinuations you like about me, they don't change either that arrogance or that ignorance. And on your fourth point: if you're going to try to jump on a high horse about anything it's best to know where the stable is. You haven't – for obvious reasons – addressed one thing I've said on climate change. So you can put on whatever outsized jodhpurs and back to front riding boots you like, carrying on about getting back to a discussion you weren't having is just more hypocrisy. Oh, and I don't mind being told by the witless that I lack wit, nor being told I'm out of my depth by someone too blind to know where the water is. I've said it before and I'll say it again: go away. If you attempt to prolong your agony with even more efforts at insinuation or abuse, no matter how inept, I'll regard you as stalking.

Wow, a month to come up with that incoherent gibberish.

I assume there'll be plenty of noisy celebrations on this thread later tonight at the ascension of Bananaby Joyce to the leadership of the Notional Party.

Are you serious? You stick your nose (again) into a conversation between ProDee and I and expect me to have spelt out the terms of what I'm doing for your benefit. If you can't be bothered checking on the posts that make up a particular conversation then maybe it'd be a good idea to mind your own business since all you do is make yourself look more ridiculous than you already are (if that's at all possible). Oh, and the word you're looking for is 'prefaced'. If anybody's been doing any pre-empting it's you. But never mind, just keep on finding ways to demonstrate your own blundering grasp on the language.

Well, as long as reading is defined only as the passage of the eyes across a series of words on a screen. Comprehension (the recognition of meaning as a result) is an entirely different matter. I'm rather bored with taking responsibility for cleaning up after your messy little acts of stupidity. Let me explain it to you in simple steps: (i) ProDee posted a link to a blog summarising a paper by Soon, Connolly and Connolly and subsequently asked for my thoughts on what – on the strength of that paper – he claimed to be 'the science' on the question of what's warming the planet; (ii) I could not open that link. I went to another blog providing a thorough and, as I said, reasonably sober summary of the Soon, Connolly and Connolly paper; (iii) I also found a link to a pdf version of the entire Soon, Connolly and Connolly paper and read the relevant parts of this. If you had any capacity to understand anything in my reply to ProDee, you would know that already; (iv) I provided my take on the standing, relevance and scientific credibility of the Soon, Connolly and Connolly paper. I made no assumptions about that paper whatsoever. Clearly you're not interested in the facts when (what you think to be) an opportunity for a bit of point scoring appears. Unfortunately you go on demonstrating how inept your powers of recognition are and how hamfisted your efforts to do anything about your misrecognition are as well. I'm sure there must be a kindergarten for denialists site somewhere on the web. Why don't you go look for it.

I suspect we do have a first-rate side, it's just that lots of them are in rehab and have never had the opportunity to play together. There are some Arsenal players who, when they fill in their travel cards, presumably just add 'injured' in the occupation section. City are much the same, of course. I was assuming they still had enough class to peg Leicester back over the next few weeks but last weekend probably took care of that. Good luck to the Foxes, at least it'll break the big money stranglehold on the title (I suppose I could say that about Spurs as well, but I'd only do so in parentheses).

Still trying to learn to read, are you Wrecker? This is what I said: "The link you’ve used for some reason doesn’t work for me, so I went to what’s probably a more a more substantive and probably more sober summary of the Soon, Connolly and Connolly (SCC) paper (on Watts Up With That?) than the blog version you’ve relied on." As I said before: go away. You're not worth dealing with.

Sorry Mr Old, I probably didn't make myself entirely clear. He's certainly out of decisions to appeal, but I can't see him letting his 'reputation' (not sure what other word to use) be eclipsed by a bunch of players without making a noise about something.

I don't know whether they lose because it's one appeal divided by 34 or they go way past Hird because it's one appeal multiplied by 34. I'm sure Hird won't give up the race quietly though, Mr Old.

They also showed some genuine class at times. Their defence can be a bit prone to panicking, but that's a reasonably common story in the EPL (the Arse are experts at it). As an Arsenal supporter I won't mind too much if Leicester end up winning the league but I won't be too happy if they win next week. It's one thing to have that pub team from Hackney in front of us on goal difference but if they go clear I suspect we'll be looking at something close to the end of the world in Islington.

She says things like this: "Arguments about CAS supposedly “tampering” with evidence are so laughably asinine, they belong in booze-filled bars and online fan forums. But they are being quietly propagated among some footy officials, and on radio by commentators. "Absurd, too, is the suggestion the CAS verdict has been torn apart by legal experts. Presumably, the same geniuses, who were hopelessly wrong in predicting that players were unlikely to receive infraction notices, in advising them to join the failed Federal Court action, and in opining that they were safe from bans at CAS, are now claiming a Swiss Federal Tribunal appeal is a sound idea." And this: "It’s likely that those signing up for the last-ditch appeal aren’t aware of the fate of tennis player Guillermo Canas. The former world No. 8 was successful in having his CAS finding annulled in the Swiss Federal Tribunal, but after the case was reheard at CAS, he was given the same penalty." And also refers to Ings' point about the need for de novo hearings being essential because otherwise a sports body could simply tank on a prosecution and WADA would be stuffed on appealing.

Isn't James Hird the frontrunner at the moment? A terrific individual effort.

A quick search on the road to Lausanne: Under article 90(2) PILA, an award may be challenged only (a) if the sole arbitrator was designated or the arbitral tribunal was constituted in an irregular way, (b) if the arbitral tribunal wrongfully accepted or declined jurisdiction, (c) if the arbitral tribunal decided on points of dispute which were not submitted or left undecided prayers for relief which were submitted, (d) if the principle of equal treatment of the parties or the right to be heard was violated or, (e) if the award is incompatible with public policy. (Meinrad Vetter Sports Law eJournal [24.10.2008]) and: The stages of the proceedings are usually: the submission of a written appeal, an invitation to the respondent to present his or her position (first exchange of written submissions), and the ruling. If necessary, a second exchange of briefs may be ordered before the final ruling is rendered. (The Paths to the Swiss Federal Supreme Court: An Outline of Switzerland’s Judicial Structure [2013]) Presumably jurisdiction is the only possibility. And not much opportunity for posturing.

I'm not entirely sure this appeal will get through the doors of the Swiss court. If, as it seems, the grounds have to do with Gordon's sophistry about the 2010 and 2013 versions of the AFL's drug code and how it might have affected CAS's jurisdiction, surely that should have been raised before the CAS hearing and the panel given the opportunity to rule itself out. My reading of their judgement was a bit hurried but I don't recall any comment on the issue. Presumably - though I'd be interested in what Jack and/or Redleg have to say - the players don't just get to raise jurisdiction on appeal when they've had every chance to do so before but failed to do so. Appeal by afterthought.

Or provide names and addresses. That might be fun.

I hope we can tie him down on a date for that, Moonie.

Interesting you should mention the Bastille, Moonie. The Marquis himself was housed there just before the revolution. History to repeat itself? And when can we expect the publication of the collected writings of BBO?

I thought that academy idea was for nurturing footballers.

Suggested edit: "I will slop stirring my words" I just don't think Robbo's capable of your too careful script, H_T