Re: Trees???
 

Calm down cashy you'll have us native think your going soft in your old age:D

Re: Trees???
 

Not really mate,I just get a little weary of some of these,who think they are special, Only Jose Mourinho merits that title.;)

Re: Trees???
 

P.M dusty mears, she volunteers for the prospects foundation & other green organisations she'll probably know who's planted them & why.

Re: Trees???
 

Re: Trees???
 

Maybe the OP can go and protest at this one and maybe find out the answers he wants for the one near Hollins

Have Your Say about Community Woodland

Re: Trees???
 

Perhaps its worth running a Sweep?:hehetable

Re: Trees???
 

Why the big black and bold?..:)..funny thing is you and some others are a good example of any Jambutty syndrome:D

Re: Trees???
 

I am in fact perfectly happy and not in the least sulking. In fact, if you knew me at all, which of course you don't, you would know that I am probably the least "sulky" person you would ever hope to meet.
I don't understand why you wonder why I asked the question in the first place? Isn't a forum of free speach a way to get answers to things that baffle us, bemuse us or have concerns about? If you consider my question "daft" perhaps you could give me an example of an "intelligent" question? What makes you think I asked the question to start an argument and why do you think I had any sort of "plan"?
As for your veiled threats of being removed from the site, I can understand if you don't like what I have to say and frankly I don't really care, but if you really do want to stifle free speech and argument just to prove you can, well that is your choice. Just remember that famous quote, "I disagree with eveything that man says but I would die to defend his right to say it".

Re: Trees???
 

Hoody blell are we down to critising print sizes now to score points.

So I can read it, why else.

Re: Trees???
 

As for your veiled threats of being removed from the site, I can understand if you don't like what I have to say and frankly I don't really care,
Youv'e just proved your a stirrer, I never made a veiled threat to removing you, I was just reminding you we have met your sort before on here. Only the mods can remove people.
And if your don't really care, then why do you bother at all. Are you just another one, quick with the Gob, talks all day and says nowt.

Re: Trees???
 

What exactly is my "sort" then, Retlaw? Am I the sort who asks a perfectly reasonable question and then gets accused of asking "daft" questions? Am I the sort who simply points out that my original question has not been answered but that it is of no consequence (how many times do I have to say that before it eventually sinks in?). Am I the sort who is accused of "sulking" because I haven't got the "answers I was looking for"? I am the sort who is called a stirrer because I suggest that there is a veiled threat (read your own words again) of removal? If that is the case then guilty as charged.
There are far better threads on this forum than this one and, as it has strayed way off the mark from my original "daft" question, I would say it is time to end it but the only reason I keep coming back to it at all is to ascertain why Less, Cashman and now your good self Retlaw seem to think that I am a troublemaker. I asked the question, I didn't get an answer (presumably because no-one knows) and it is seriously not a problem to me.

Re: Trees???
 

There you go again, getting personal and also getting it wrong, I don't think you're a troublemaker I have yet to form any real opinion of you at all, though you are making it easier with each of your posts to guide me towards a definite conclusion.
:D

Re: Trees???
 

See jumping to the wrong conclusion again, I don't think yer a troublemaker at all, A Balloon certainly, a troublemaker not at this stage.:rolleyes: And the famous quote yeh quoted in a previous post backs up my conclusion, if yeh reckon it holds good.:rolleyes:

Re: Trees???
 

I said "seem to think", my impression not a statement of fact and perhaps you would point out how I was getting personal? I was replying in the main to actual statements made by you (meaning you generically not individually) and I believe I have the right to make myself clear.
I am really not that disagreeable. I think that perhaps we should draw a line under all this and start again. Circular arguments aren't really my thing and I'm pretty sure that there are a lot of things we agree on. I think my posts on other threads show that. This is, of course, not to say I will never argue again.
Suffice to say that nothiing I have said was meant to be personal in a derogatory way but if anyone has taken it to be so please accept my apologies.

Re: Trees???
 

How magnanimous, of you to allow us to start again, I for one will if you will, meanwhile allow me a few reservations.
:)