So I was responsible for panicking the people, huh? Wow. I think my post came somewhere in the 3rd or 4th page of posts and everyone was cool calm and collected till they read my post, huh? Just wow. My deepest apologies for upsetting everyone.
I didn’t say everyone. But I wasn’t alone.
You come off like somebody who was educated *cough-cough* in a public high school after 1975. If so, it’s not your fault. You should have stated what was being said on Fox.
The thread discussion up until your post was mainly of two veins: one, panic about the report; two, eventual speculation and hope that it was an unreliable source or a hoax. You replied to a post that was bemoaning the fate of our country and referred to the Fox report news item/announcement as “it.” Looking back, I see that I was not the only person alarmed by your post because you were, in essence, confirming the report by stating that Fox was reporting “it” now, in reply to somebody bemoaning the bad news. It goes like this:
*first, the headline, from Drudge: “Joe Died”
*then, the discussion, from all, including FReeper “Bob”: “Oh, my God! We’re doomed!”
*next, hesitancy, from some: “Maybe they’re wrong? Maybe Joe isn’t dead? It might be a bad source. We need another source!”
*last, the reply to FReeper “Bob”, from beckysueB: “Fox reporting it now.”
“it” refers back to FReeper Bob’s exclamation of doom. Even if you meant to refer to the discussion about the source being defective, nobody has any way of knowing that you meant it was a defective source/false story because YOU DID NOT STATE WHAT FOX WAS REPORTING.
Why don’t you just admit you goofed, learn from it and do better the next time by slowing down and being more concise? Instead, you’re spinning yourself silly to make stupid, implausible excuses for your error. We could have been done with this long ago if you weren’t overly sensitive and/or too stubborn and/or unwilling to see the problem with your post.