[tacticalogic]

it is apparent from your posts that you adopt the argumentative’ tactics’ of some others on this forum who ignore the truly problematic issues while rummaging the building over looking for spider webs with which to accuse the owner of being an unfit caretaker when the majority of what is accomplished by the caretaker is more than adequate to maintain the building in fine fine shape. In other words- it seems apparentr that you’re willing to ignore the bulk of evidence just for the chance to fine moot points with which to argue- apparently it’s your hope to disuade others from from taking the bulk seriously by pointing out that some moot points aren’t entirel;y 200% spot on.

It's spring, and we've had lots of rain. I've got a couple of acres of grass that needs cut, fence rows that need cleared, and trees that need trimmed and brush cleaned up. I don't have time to worry about your "spider webs". You're showing me the mailbox and trying to tell me it's the foundation, and I don't have time to play right now.

[CottShop]

ya right- what you mean is you don’t have time to play the game the way you like- you want everyone to do all the leg work for you and even at that you’ll ignore the bulk (of which I’ve provided you with plenty) and argue about the spider webs-. In a way it’s good you don’t want to play because I won’t play by your interpretatyion because quite frankly I hate these silly little merry go round games- the evidence you requested has bewen posted- check them out or not I could care less.