Wizzle Wassell:
Wizzle Wassell:
Wizzle Wassell:
I suggest you stop using the word hearsay, as I don’t think it means what you think it does. Gregster is not repeating second hand information, which would be hearsay, but is providing verifiable links to both the law and specific cases where it was applied.my question was ‘And you have proof of any of these settlements or is this just general hearsay?’
Gregster can not provide any proof - so that then is hearsay!
Wizzle Wassell:
As far as I can figure out, you’re upset here that Gregster and I insist on arguing our positions effectively, and you think that’s not fair or some kind of trick…This is EXACTLY my previous point to you - you raise a point and it MUST be valid despite anything that is said on here - we raise a point and if you don’t agree with it then there is always some reason that you can wiggle out of it.
Wizzle Wassell:
There’s that word again! Again though I’m having a hard time interpreting what you’re trying to say here, are you implying that the settlement article that Gregster linked to was somehow faked? All those links are dummies somehow created and backdated by Gregster, that wily Svengali of the internet? Well I’d be impressed if he could do that, but I think there are far more likely explanations, most having to do with someone failing to use Wikipedia before using a new word.No, for lots of reasons you have no proof of settlements so guy this is hearsay!
Last edited: