Chucky V’s spaz v’s anyone else
BTW the term “diatribe” is a verbal attack and impossible to achieve in the written sense.
Wrong again, look it up.
Still, I’m glad you got my Nietzsche reference.
I’ll admit you got me at a moment of extreme 
and, well… late on a Saturday night.
I did check my dictionary but only the first definition before making comment.
I later googled “diatribe” and believe I can argue this point as the only thing I noticed in reference to it, in the written sense, is a news paper column named such. There were some results that say it is a continual onslaught of abuse but everywhere (but the newspaper column) suggest it is verbal.
Since your degree is in journalism, common vernacular amongst your peers is enough for me to concede your stance of me being “wrong again”. FOR NOW (allowing for your limited education and my lack of any qualification).
I will check with my very cute friend, whom I drink with once per week, (She has a maj, in Eng. Lit. and soon will be prof.) to confirm.
We shall visit this later. And I might re-name this thread thus. chucky’s diatribe”
Although it took a small amount of time (10min) to get your Nietzsche reference, you posted in a way to suggest to readers I you had a greater knowledge on the topic and so posted with a short sentence that might ridicule my comment. I feel you missed my insinuation that you are a wanker and would be more sociable if you got laid. As that was what I baited the hook with.
can i ask wtf is going on here 
lol
can i ask wtf is going on here
You can!!!!! Yes!!!!!
Is it worth it????? No!!!!!
You state; first - that crackers lacks the necessary intellect.
But then that c******s purposely chose to inflame it.
I disagree: (if) c******s lacks intellect then how could they have purposely inflamed it.C******s is like a bratty child who takes pleasure in tormenting a seemingly docile dog - pushing it to the point where it finally snaps back, then hypocritically playing the victim. That doesn’t take intellect, just the opposite. It’s truly pathetic.
Either this is the event that sparked this debate, or you just called yourself docile.
Whichever it was, on both accounts. C*****rs acted with human nature. ie: to test limits and push boundries. I commend him for that.
Yet, you feel inclined to continually torment a person who you believe is a bratty child and pathetic. This makes you worse than pathetic, bratty or hypocritical. You leaves doors open (set traps) for people of presumedly simpler intellect, then take pleasure in slamming the door as they enter.
_______________________________________________
As my friend chucky, Be aware!
(although I am enjoying this debate), awareness of how the greater online community may view this prose (not just BWM, but anyone with access to the internet - as this is a public forum), you should consider.
You are aware of the many times my writings on this and other forums have been presented to the court and used against me in attempts to defame - and to some degree have had success. I wouldn’t want the same to happen to you. Nor for the greater community to form an opinion of you purely based on these comments.
_______________________________________________
can i ask wtf is going on here
You can!!!!! Yes!!!!!
Is it worth it????? No!!!!!
Spot on MK!
I don’t really know what’s going on.
The best I can deduce is this is the online equivalent of two mates getting in a skuffle, One mate trying to stop his friend from getting in a bar fight by dragging him outside only the two mates start fighting each other.
Entertaining to watch. You guys can just stand around and chant in unison “FIGHT, FIGHT, FIGHT”
Yeah, but ya a still a Wanker!!!!!
Most snowboarders are.
Yeah, but ya a still a Wanker!!!!!
Most snowboarders are.
Got me there, Fred!!!!! You are good!!!!!
can i ask wtf is going on here
You can!!!!! Yes!!!!!
Is it worth it????? No!!!!!
Spot on MK!I don’t really know what’s going on.
The best I can deduce is this is the online equivalent of two mates getting in a skuffle, One mate trying to stop his friend from getting in a bar fight by dragging him outside only the two mates start fighting each other.
Entertaining to watch. You guys can just stand around and chant in unison “FIGHT, FIGHT, FIGHT”
I prefer to go back into the bar where it’s nice and quiet, and get myself another drink!!!!!
Etymology
Latin diatriba (“learned discussion or discourse”), from Ancient Greek ???????? (diatrib?, “way of spending time, lecture”), from ??? (dia, “through”) + ????? (trib?, “I waste, wear out”)
can i ask wtf is going on here
You can!!!!! Yes!!!!!
Is it worth it????? No!!!!!
Spot on MK!I don’t really know what’s going on.
The best I can deduce is this is the online equivalent of two mates getting in a skuffle, One mate trying to stop his friend from getting in a bar fight by dragging him outside only the two mates start fighting each other.
Entertaining to watch. You guys can just stand around and chant in unison “FIGHT, FIGHT, FIGHT”
I prefer to go back into the bar where it’s nice and quiet, and get myself another drink!!!!!
Then you owe me one later for getting everyone out of the bar and leaving you an empty seat and no waiting for service 
Etymology
Latin diatriba (“learned discussion or discourse”), from Ancient Greek ???????? (diatrib?, “way of spending time, lecture”), from ??? (dia, “through”) + ????? (trib?, “I waste, wear out”)
Can I assume that since this word came to be used at a time when little was written and most knowledge was passed on verbally, through “lecture or discussion” that it is more commonly used to describe verbal dialog not written?
That until an American newspaper named a column Diatribe it had little to do with written communication?
That journalists use common vernacular as an excuse to cover their own mistakes and poor use of English Literature?
Since the profession of journalism is to report on events or steer public opinion for political favour they often lead sheeple in the direction the chose.
Yeah, but ya a still a Wanker!!!!!
Most snowboarders are.
Got me there, Fred!!!!! You are good!!!!!
I know.
. . . or you just called yourself docile.
I tried to be, I really did. It didn’t take.
Whichever it was, on both accounts. C*****rs acted with human nature. ie: to test limits and push boundries. I commend him for that.
Nah, the “C” word probably just got bored pullig the wings off flies, and wanted to step it up a notch. The makings of a serial killer.
Yet, you feel inclined to continually torment a person who you believe is a bratty child and pathetic. This makes you worse than pathetic, bratty or hypocritical. You leaves doors open (set traps) for people of presumedly simpler intellect, then take pleasure in slamming the door as they enter.
Nope. I opened the door to civilised denouement. The “C” word set his own traps, and ignorantly stumbled right into them. If someone chooses to bite off more than they can chew, I’m gracious enough to allow them to choke on it. Darwinism.
As my friend chucky, Be aware!
(although I am enjoying this debate), awareness of how the greater online community may view this prose . . .. . . or the greater community to form an opinion of you purely based on these comments.
Yeah mate, but that would require me to actually give a shit about what the “greater online community” thought of me. Anyone worthy of my intellectual respect (who could be bothered reading through the “C” word’s puerile rants, and my consequent responses) would see that my critique was spot on, so I’m cool with that.
Etymology
Latin diatriba (“learned discussion or discourse”), from Ancient Greek ???????? (diatrib?, “way of spending time, lecture”), from ??? (dia, “through”) + ????? (trib?, “I waste, wear out”)Can I assume that since this word came to be used at a time when little was written and most knowledge was passed on verbally, through “lecture or discussion” that it is more commonly used to describe verbal dialog not written?
Yup. However, online forums etc. significantly blur the line betwen “written” and “spoken” - partly explaining the exceptions to traditional ‘rules’.
Although quit amusing; using “C” word instead of the tasteful way I set it to be, I find very distracting. And the insinuation it leads to, is outside the boundary of what Box Head would be happy with.