Well of course you do. Show me how you dispute the fact that she was talking about biological children. Which was part of my point, which you neglected to answer in your post to me.
Not only was I not wrong, but I certainly was not completely wrong...
If you want to back up your denial of what I said, then you will have a case.
And good for you for not using the reg date, I never have either. I think it is a moot point as you can see by the post of mine that you responded to.
That is a pretty broad brush, that we have all taken our lumps here.
I have never until now from you. Thanks for being the first person to give me a "lump".
If you want to discourage new people from participating here, and have to have them get "lumps" go for it.
I think this website has better goals than that IMO.
Oh, and sorry you have had to take lumps. I hope you learned from them. Of course that doesn't give you the privilege of giving them to others, or does it?
It is insulting to only discuss bio kids. That's what angers me and others on this thread. She's excluding him on the basis that he was adopted. Michael was RR's child too, and deserves to be included in discussions about birth order. There's nothing you can say that will ever change my mind about that.
"And good for you for not using the reg date, I never have either."
Good grief. Yes you have. You just posted your registration date here:
"I know some of you have been here a long time, I am a relative newcomer having signed up just a while ago on Nov 27, 1997."
This is discussion board. There are disagreements here all the time. If you want to press the abuse button on me for calling a newbie "creepy" then go ahead. Maybe management will be interested in your complaints about me. I don't have any more time for them.