Which animals are an even match for humans in a race?

Timing? From you? lol wrote:

Bad Wigins wrote:

4 pages, 80 posts, only 11 of them by me including this one - an average of only 2.1 per page of 20, with an original non-clickbait topic, complete with several days of entertaining discussions about horses, dogs, persistence hunting, fish, and even snakes... and NOW you come barging in anonymously with this bitter heckling? You need to work on your timing.

You are a lost cause. Hoping to save him in this regard.

Most of the intelligent posts on this thread are mine. Just fyi

The Bassett hound comment? Me.

Good for you to admit to that. Slow is your hallmark.

Ay chihuahua!

old and tired schtick wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

And this is such a serious thread, deserving to be taken very seriously - especially by you, even though it was started by Bad Wigins, of whom you so much approve. I can see why you are not trying to be humorous. It's a foreign country for someone like you. But since you also presume to be expert on the subject, give us an example of your coruscating wit.

You're having trouble reading. The thread can still be taken seriously since it's a valid subject. At no point did I suggest Wigins has ever been funny. That was my point. Don't emulate him.

We must never make light of "serious" or "valid" subjects, it appears. Irony - it is quite apparent you don't approve of Bad Wigins - also escapes you, which is characteristic of the humourless. But in your pompous adjudication on what is or is not humorous you succeed in being amusing.

Armstronglivs wrote:

old and tired schtick wrote:

You're having trouble reading. The thread can still be taken seriously since it's a valid subject. At no point did I suggest Wigins has ever been funny. That was my point. Don't emulate him.

We must never make light of "serious" or "valid" subjects, it appears. Irony - it is quite apparent you don't approve of Bad Wigins - also escapes you, which is characteristic of the humourless. But in your pompous adjudication on what is or is not humorous you succeed in being amusing.

It's universal. Nobody on here has ever cracked even the slightest smile at BWs decade of attempts at being funny.

It's totally fine to make light if you have even the slightest talent at humor.

But at least you admit that I am funny. Learn from me.

Timing? From you? lol wrote:

Most of the intelligent posts on this thread are mine. Just fyi

The Bassett hound comment? Me.

Just fyi, it's spelled "Basset," as long as we're being intelligent. And you can't prove any post other than the one quoted was yours.

But it would make sense, as butt hurt as you clearly are about it being replied to, and would explain your piss poor timing since it was one of the last posts on page 4.

By which time, as I so patiently explained, the thread was already in the bank, another great circus of mirth and jolliness cleverly arranged by me. Now here you are after the show bitterly hissing from the empty seats. This is page 5, guy, nobody cares.

Your Teacher wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

We must never make light of "serious" or "valid" subjects, it appears. Irony - it is quite apparent you don't approve of Bad Wigins - also escapes you, which is characteristic of the humourless. But in your pompous adjudication on what is or is not humorous you succeed in being amusing.

It's universal. Nobody on here has ever cracked even the slightest smile at BWs decade of attempts at being funny.

It's totally fine to make light if you have even the slightest talent at humor.

But at least you admit that I am funny. Learn from me.

Possessing wit and being laughed at are not quite the same thing. You might want to learn that.

Meanwhile Bad Wigins spent three months of his life trying to be funny on the flat Earth thread.

As for Armstronglivs? OK Boomer.

sayer of OK wrote:

Meanwhile Bad Wigins spent three months of his life trying to be funny on the flat Earth thread.

As for Armstronglivs? OK Boomer.

Somehow, that doesn't have the sting that is intended. If you ever have the good fortune to make it to 60 - it isn't guaranteed - you'll realise how little you knew at half that age.

Armstronglivs wrote:

sayer of OK wrote:

Meanwhile Bad Wigins spent three months of his life trying to be funny on the flat Earth thread.

As for Armstronglivs? OK Boomer.

Somehow, that doesn't have the sting that is intended. If you ever have the good fortune to make it to 60 - it isn't guaranteed - you'll realise how little you knew at half that age.

OK Boomer.

sayer of OK wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

Somehow, that doesn't have the sting that is intended. If you ever have the good fortune to make it to 60 - it isn't guaranteed - you'll realise how little you knew at half that age.

OK Boomer.

Boomer is ok. But keep repeating yourself. That's how children learn.

Armstronglivs wrote:

sayer of OK wrote:

OK Boomer.

Boomer is ok. But keep repeating yourself. That's how children learn.

The decline begins at 30. You have half the brain you had 30 years ago. That's why you can't learn.

OK Boomer wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

Boomer is ok. But keep repeating yourself. That's how children learn.

The decline begins at 30. You have half the brain you had 30 years ago. That's why you can't learn.

Reverting to the subject title of the thread, we can see you aren't an even match for anything. Let us know when you have mastered the times-table.

Armstronglivs wrote:

OK Boomer wrote:

The decline begins at 30. You have half the brain you had 30 years ago. That's why you can't learn.

Reverting to the subject title of the thread, we can see you aren't an even match for anything. Let us know when you have mastered the times-table.

You're reverting to the child state, Boomer. Diapers are in your future.

____ er of ___ is among the most disturbed and obsessive posters ever, and genuinely has nothing better to do than this. Let it go or it will never end.