duffer
Well-Known Member
I didn't think it was "necessary", just something I decided to do. It is admittedly truncated, potted, brief or whatever word you wish to use. I said it wasn't exhaustive. Do you realise how much material there is? For those bullet points alone there are over 30 A4 sheets of supporting articles.
To be honest I think I can live with you being a little disappointed in me.
I think the complaint here isn't that it's truncated, potted or brief - I think it's that it's selective.
In fact in one key aspect of your understanding, ownership of the land by CCFC, it's also simply wrong.
I like anyone who's willing to bring real evidence to the table though, especially new stuff.
What were your sources for the money that CCFC spent on the signage, and gave to Nuneaton & Bedworth btw? (I ask because that is entirely new to me, and as an obsessive, I like to know these things!).