Squire Fulwood
Expert
- Messages
- 6,111
- Type of diabetes
- Type 2
- Treatment type
- Diet only
I think someone can't spell. Charletans is spelled Charletans and Christians is spelled Christians.
I think someone can't spell. Charletans is spelled Charletans and Christians is spelled Christians.Charlatans must be thrilled every time a link to their click bait nonsense sites is shared over here.
It hasn't made any sense since someone read the word charlatan and thought it was a religious attack.Have there been posts deleted from this thread?
It makes no sense as it stands...
And i certainly don't associate charlatans with any particular religious persuasion.
Not quite sure about anyone picking on the French either but I don't necessarily object.@BrianTheElder I never accused any one of being anything other than somewhat offensive. And why pick on the French.
I don't normally read threads that have gone on for a while. The reason is that they lose the plot and then turn into arguments about football or religion. This one has not mentioned football yet.
?? Charlatan does not equal Christian!!@Avocado Sevenfold I saw no religious connotations on that site Christian or other wise.. So if you can please point it out to me I will stand corrected.
Oh and I found your post somewhat offensive bye the way.
@Avocado Sevenfold I saw no religious connotations on that site Christian or other wise.. So if you can please point it out to me I will stand corrected.
Oh and I found your post somewhat offensive bye the way.
I think that @Robinredbreast is correct. I believe that John misread "charlatans" for "Christians." I think that this is a simple mix-up and that no-one meant offence to anotherCharlatans must be thrilled every time a link to their click bait nonsense sites is shared over here.
Edit to add I thought this was a forum concerned with diabetes I do not come here to involve myself in arguments about faith or lack of it.
No deletions. I posted one line and it is there to see.Have there been posts deleted from this thread?
It makes no sense as it stands...
And i certainly don't associate charlatans with any particular religious persuasion.
Another irony is that I wrote my charlatan post to state my opinion that these snake-oil sites must love being linked from large, established sites such as this one. They prey on the vulnerable and desperate for their advertising revenue. And now my post has caused offence and has bumped the thread more than if I had said nothing.Does no-one else see the irony in this?
I really don't think so. Perhaps @Administrator is able to check on whether @Avocado Sevenfold edited her post no 9 on this thread? I certainly only saw the word 'charlatan' which is why I went on to give the dictionary definition of it. It's also why I got so confused about it causing offence. It certainly doesn't say 'edited' which would mean it would have been done straight away.Not deleted but Edited I think.
Well, it gets even more exciting (who needs football?). Was Avocado being "economical with the truth" at post 33, or does John need new glasses.Not deleted but Edited I think.
Not deleted but Edited I think.
Thank you for this. I am sorry I have bothered @Administrator unnecessarily.Can you elaborate on that a little so I can take a look @JohnEGreen ?
Just to confirm, the original post by @Avocado Sevenfold was not edited or altered in any way as I have checked for you just now
Thank you for confirming this.Can you elaborate on that a little so I can take a look @JohnEGreen ?
Just to confirm, the original post by @Avocado Sevenfold was not edited or altered in any way as I have checked for you just now
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?