Quote Originally Posted by CCFCC3PO View Post
Well done on rewriting history. Someone (who? I can't remember) replied to themselves, and I did the unconventional thing and questioned why it was such a big deal. You then came up with the excuse that he accidentally replied to himself by forgetting to log in to his other account. Considering that you also erroneously accused me of doing the same thing, I simply concluded you were a ladder short of a window washing round and decided that you were building up a reputation and habit for accusing people outside of your clique as being "multis" but, despite this being your forum, each time you have accused people you have produced absolutely no evidence.
Here you go, it was Croesy who replied to themselves,

My Clique

Quote Originally Posted by blue matt View Post
why did you you reply to / quote a post of your own ? ? ?

did you forget something ? ? ?
Quote Originally Posted by CCFCC3PO View Post
Is it a big deal?
Quote Originally Posted by blue matt View Post
just a strange thing to do, maybe not in your world ? ? ?, but most of us dont need to quote our own posts and reply like another person
Quote Originally Posted by CCFCC3PO View Post
Sometimes it is a convenient way to reply to a thread. I was never aware that there was a rule book for internet forums. I would say it is less damaging than having cookies installed on your device even after specifically clicking on the reject all cookies button (in breach of GDPR laws). And, it is less damaging than having a site URL that reads "Not Secure". I use an old laptop to connect to this site and it is interesting how much stuff I've picked up directly from this site.

But, yeah, it's probably best to concentrate on someone replying to their own post. That's far more productive in your role as webmaster.

Oh and it was JRH, i was right

Quote Originally Posted by J R Hartley View Post
He probably meant to log in as Rudy Gestede

i hope that helps you with your history lesson