About Me

My photo
No Fixed Abode, Home Counties, United Kingdom
I’m a 51-year-old Aspergic CAD-Monkey. Sardonic, cynical and with the political leanings of a social reformer, I’m also a toy and model figure collector, particularly interested in the history of plastics and plastic toys. Other interests are history, current affairs, modern art, and architecture, gardening and natural history. I love plain chocolate, fireworks and trees but I don’t hug them, I do hug kittens. I hate ignorance, when it can be avoided, so I hate the 'educational' establishment and pity the millions they’ve failed with teaching-to-test and rote 'learning' and I hate the short-sighted stupidity of the entire ruling/industrial elite, with their planet destroying fascism and added “buy-one-get-one-free”. I also have no time for fools and little time for the false crap we're all supposed to pretend we haven't noticed, or the games we're supposed to play.

Saturday, January 7, 2017

B is for Back to Jabbering Hutt's, Bugger's Monkeys and Boxes - Red and Blue

Being my rebuttal of Paul Stadinger (the Jabbering Fuck)'s post, co-starring a Cock-wackin' Monkey-lizard called Erwin Sell, dated 17th December 2015


Part 1a - Their Bit

Oh dear! Well; let's start at the beginning; it's usually the best place to start from! My stuff's in green, theirs in grey, corrections (where possible) in red, all else in blue!

===============================================================

Warning, the language below is rich with Anglo-Saxon invective and mild to very severe gratuitous filth from my otherwise fair fingers, tap-tapping away! My mind; according to Drs'. Liska and Burk - I can't answer for, but apparently it's less than fair, being altogether darker!

If you are a blanched-flower with a dislike of earthy language, go away. Split-pig!

If you believe in a pan-dimensional mega-being or pantheon of suchlike and hate to read what you see - in your self-deluded state - as blasphemy, go away. And you're going to hell 'cos the other lot's is the real one!

If mummy told you swearing is a sign of a lack of intelligence or a limited vocabulary, go away. And she was wrong - by the way.

If you are of nervous disposition and jump at the sight of 'four letter words', go AWAY.

If you don't like cuss-words. eff-off!

Otherwise . . .please; scroll down





Keep Scrolling





You have been warned





Keep scrolling





I won't tell you again





Keep scrolling





So the curious fucker's who love a train-wreck are still with me huh? Let's get this - I suspect - much anticipated shit-fest on the rails then . . .

===============================================================

Erwin Sell versus Hugh Walters - Blue Box - Part One

It's clear to anyone reading the following diatribe that it's actually both Messer's Paul Stadinger (hereafter - the Jabbering Hutt) AND Erwin Sell (hereafter - the Crumb) 'versus' me (and the use of the word 'versus' in instructive as to the state of their minds in the matter) backed-up in the comments section by the leading members of the Penn-State Toy Soldier Mafia (hereafter - PSTSM) and a couple of people who should know better?

My name is Walter not Walters, and as the only 'toy' points they make further down the 'article' concentrate on Red Box, what we have here is a nine-word block-heading which manages to be disingenuous, dishonest, deliberately rude, and definitely combative while lacking the correct punctuation, spelling or - even - an accurate subject matter!

Need I go on? I should really rise above their swamp?

Ohhh . . . all right then . . . if you insist! OK! ok . . . you can let go of the arm now . . .

Posted on December 17, 2016 by admin

They posted this shit for Christmas week? Really? Some sort of hell-bound atheist-scum obviously, the pair ov'em! That's a joke, but there's a point in there, it'll go over their heads like a fucking aeroplane though! It's a measure of the manner and mettle of the men involved.

Erwin Sell versus Hugh Walters - Blue Box - Part One [line break needed] For [the] past few years one of the pleasures of this blog has been the comments and articles from Erwin Sell. Erwin has shared many interesting pieces of information with us. Some of his information has changed our viewpoint on various items (they fell for it then!). I know many people have enjoyed his comments.

Erwin has posted to other blogs with comments and corrections [citation needed]. Not everyone has appreciated his input. One of those people is Hugh Walters of Small Scale World. Hugh wrote a 12,000 word attack (go, enjoy, again!) against Erwin on his site. Erwin looked over the article and found Hugh’s attacks [to be] lacking in facts and accuracy. This post is the first in a series of responses to Hugh’s attack. We are [I am] posting Erwin’s response as we were [I was] also attacked in Hugh’s article.

Not everyone has appreciated his input - I'm not surprised, he makes it up as he goes along!

One of those people is Hugh Walters of Small Scale World - Glad I had enough sense!

12.000 words - Really? I could have sworn it was more!

First in a series - Well, I look forwards to part two as I've found part one to be a most amusing and illustrative example of the fuckwitted's attempt at the art of literature. How many parts in total I wonder, they'll lose their justification for sarcastic word-counts if they're not too careful and their sarcasm will turn to hypocrisy, as quick as beer turns to piss!

We were also attacked - I'm glad you took that; hook, line and sinker!

Erwin Sell versus Hugh Walters - Blue Box - Part One - Assumption

We then get a third repeat of the title? There are more - with what would be sub-headings if punctuation was employed - further down the page, are we (dear reader) to assume the Jabbering Hutt thinks repeating the title through the body of the 'work' (he does it all the time) improves your Google-ranking?

It doesn't; the title box is read by Google-bots for tags, the text box remains 'text' ignored by Google - elementary error that just makes a lot of his posts harder to read!

I have been forced to respond to a vicious attack  by a person who calls himself a master expert of plastic small “and all else of a course toys.” [Rewrite. Make more believable?] This person Hugh Walters from the UK (yeah . . . bloody UK again; huh!) got upset after I sent a minor email to one of his postings over a year ago!  In that email I questioned  the veracity of a posting on his site. Because of my email Hugh responded with a posting that is full of hate and arrogance. 

Now, Mr Crumb finally enters the fray! Look out Hugh! You're in danger of being mauled to death by the Hutt's attack-hamster! He starts with a double quote (or a single quote split in two with quotation marks?), to wit:

"a person who calls himself a master expert of plastic small “and all else of a course toys."
Sigh!

...plastic small - Is that like disposable kecks?

all else of a course" - Dear readers - you all know I don't use language like that, Mr Crumb uses "All Else" all the time, I rarely use them together if at all. It's not even English! Of a [golf] course?

Do they not even bother to check-read their stuff and edit it, before publishing; they had days, weeks, months even, to cobble this together and yet they seem to have left half the cobbles back in the yard? Are they so thick it reads 'ok' to them? We're dealing with grown men here writing like children, but doubtlessly wanting to be taken seriously!

Now, this is a man I have accused of making it up as he goes along, doing just that; making it up as he goes along!

I challenge anyone in the whole known universe (watch the hyperbole here Hugh, you seem to have the moral upper-hand, don't blow it!) to provide the hot-links to wherever on the Internet I said either part (or the whole) of the quote/s given by Mr Crumb?

Goo'whaan! You know you want to! No, this is actually a clear case of misrepresentation, probably constituting defamation or slander or - more accurately 'Libel' as it's a written/published falsehood; not spoken - in any event it's a dishonest lie, published as a quote (ascribed to me), by the Jabbering Hutt.

One of them may be over-here in May, he keeps saying he will be and then never turns up, perhaps I should have the requisite legal papers drawn-up to be served to him at his hotel? Any litigators out there want an easy case - I've taken dated screen-capchas!

I have been forced - While I would love the opportunity to force Mr. Crumb to explain himself, I fear he has only 'felt the need' to respond, no one's forced him!

I sent a minor email / Because of my email - He has never sent me an eMail, unless he confuses public comments with private eMails, as he appears to; further down the piece; repeatedly?

Arrogance - I am actually quite self-depreciating (sometimes!), regularly calling myself a 'fuckwit' and have gone on record as saying "I'm no expert..." more than once. It would however, be fair to accuse me of enthusiastic self-assuredness? Or the arrogance of the British which is a national-trait that winds-up lots of . . . err . . . ahem . . .JF's?

So the early premise of Mr Crumb's devastating counter-attack is to establish a lie supposedly from my own mouth? Of course it would be - as I've already pointed out - he makes it up as he goes along!

I will start by showing  how Hugh’s derogatory comments against me are very unprofessional (I'm a professional now?) and insulting. He has taken from Stadsstuff’s blog various comments I have made (so I couldn't be accused of making it up as he just has).  He then twisted the comments to his own benefit.

We're not professionals, we're fucking toy bloggers, if I was a professional-anything I would never have posted the original article - as I wouldn't have been dealing with an idiot like him, not even obliquely!

I didn't 'twist' his words, I quoted them in full (with all typos) and then explained with empirical evidence available to anyone willing to do the legwork (the Jabbering Hutt and Mr. Crumb aren't!) why he was wrong. It was for the benefit of the hobby in calling out a bullshitter, not for my benefit; I only had to photograph the Aussie's bases' to win that one!

When we write on the history about of toys we should use only facts. Not supposition, prejudices, or better yet [worse yet;] “ASUMPTIONS” [incorrect use of quotes]. It's well interesting to note that Hugh constantly (occasionally) uses the phrase (“WE can assume” [incorrect use of brackets]) as if he speaks for many, or most, or all and assuming as a fact [?] (Facts and assumptions are not the same)!!!. I would like know what organization he  represents as he uses 'we' a lot.

He (Crumb) uses 'we' himself, then - in the same paragraph - attacks me for using 'we'! The hypocrite, you can't make this shit up (well - he can!); too funny! It's the 'we' who are reading down the page together, the cretinous-dullard; he's just used it himself - twice! Fuck-me; he's as dumb as mud in a mocha'chino.

The reader has read down the same page, looked at the same photographs and can be assumed (if he's followed the train of thought) by the author to be reaching the same conclusion - a conclusion that remains open to question as it's an assumption, not a fact. The comment box remains/exists for those who don't see it, or don't agree! It's like talking to a child trying to explain basic principles of presentation to him.

We should use only facts - Pity he doesn't then, isn't it? Is that the Royal We?

most all - like all else!

I use facts not assumptions, as you will see that in my responses to his attacks. As Miguel Ruiz said  in his The Four Agreements - A Practical Guide to Personal Freedom “If others tell us something we make assumptions, and if they don’t tell us something we make assumptions to fulfill our need to know and to replace the need to communicate. Even if we hear something and we don’t understand we make assumptions about what it means and then believe the assumptions. We make all sorts of assumptions because we don’t have the courage to ask questions.” [Translation needed] Wordy, worthy and a complete red herring, unless you're a student of Toltec mysticism! Presumably the Crumb thinks it'll lend him an air of intellectuality?

It's OK to make assumptions if you make it clear/say you are - in order to set-up or pose the next question/s! I don't know if he's being deliberately disingenuous here or just really stupid, but it's more fuckwittery!

I use facts not assumptions - Errr...actually I spent 12,260-something words proving that's exactly what he often doesn't do! If he used more assumptions and less of HIS [made up as he goes along] 'facts', I probably never would have posted the 12,000-worder . . . too stupid

Does he not understand that an 'assumption' - if declared - is still open to interpretation, to debate, to further adjustment? Still too stupid - but at least we now have a clue to his constantly making it up as he goes along; an aversion to rational assumption! Whatafuckwit!

Erwin Sell versus Hugh Walters - Blue Box - Part One - Personal Attack

I will start (you started four paragraphs above!) my response by looking at Hugh’s response on to my comment [about the Blue...&etc]

“So, on the 9th July last year (2015) I received a comment on the Blue Box British and Russians article (go, read, enjoy) from someone calling himself ‘against (he's corrected his typo here (falsifying the 'quote') even though it remains his Blogger ID!) [sic] all banners’? Signed to an ‘Erwin’; it said – and I’ll quote him in full throughout, with his own words –

I will like to suggest for 40-50 mm scale Blue box original data picture (?) to contact me if [you would] like x (?) [and] some updates and information. Your link is interesting in many aspects but there some confusing /mixed data regarding BB company of which I owned most of their modern/western and medieval/else sets.
The Aussies listed as BB original are not BB (yes they are). The one marching poses is neither from original BB set of six poses (yes it is). Rado did sold [sell] a cloned full set of original BB Aussies as you have listed.
BB partisans were done in 45-47 mm scale (no they weren't) ;and few other detail.(?)
All my collection comes [or came] from my childhood and is true to the point. (what point?)
I have done 3 visit in [the] past to original HK facilities of BB as well as now a Chinese factory and the RADO office still in HK.I do travel to China often and my main idea is to supply the right information based in my experience. In past PW magazine had published several of my works/findings based on it and else (?). In case [you're] interested you may contact me as you like.(I like 'never' - I've got a life, note: 'and else')
Thank you, best regards,
Erwin

Is that it? He's going to quote my quote of his quote and then move-on to another heading bar? And the point of that was . . . err . . . exactly? Exactly . . . fucktard!

Erwin Sell versus Hugh Walters - Blue Box - Part One - Hugh’s Vicious Attack

“All pretty straightforward, if hard to read and couched in ‘factually’ believable language – if correct – I think you’ll agree.”
Hugh goes one step further in his post. [Never interrupt a direct quote with extraneous or superfluous text. Or use brackets] “I replied as politely as I could muster, given it appeared this person was A) calling me – at best – wrong; at worst – a liar and B) appeared to be either a foreigner writing with English as a second language; a semi-literate retard, or; a fantasist child…”

By suggesting the Australians were not Blue Box the comment-poster was either calling me wrong or a liar (for saying they were), and the level of spelling, punctuation, grammar and use of caps/lower-case, line brakes and the space bar meant he/she was also either a child, or semi-literate, or (as appears to be the case) a foreigner? Indeed; a semi-literate foreigner!

Not a "vicious attack" ('viscous' - too funny! This guy's too fucking funny; tragically funny - actually), but a remarkably accurate summation of the situation! Bearing in mind we now know he had attacked the veracity of my post a few minutes earlier on Stad's Stuff

Erwin Sell versus Hugh Walters - Blue Box - Part One - My Response

The response proper finally starts (as a third starting!) halfway down the page and yet they attacked me for verbosity, although they didn't use the term, they maybe can't spell it and probably don't know what it means! [Shut-up Hugh; you said voracity when you meant veracity - you fuckwit!]

I would like to say that I am not native to the United States. As most people know I was born in Cuba and lived there until we got out.  In Cuba, English was not taught in most schools like other countries.  The language they more taught (?) was Russian . Because of this restriction I had to learn English in the United States, but I have trouble writing it.  I speak it very well. Besides English, I also speak other languages.

His response to his lie about the Blue Box Australians is to bang-on about Russian for a bit? He never actually explains why he was (and remains) wrong about the Australians, just attempts to justify the wrong comment. And he should try writing as he speaks - if he 'speaks it very well'!

I respond to most blogs from my cell phone. The reason for doing it this way is because of my demanding schedule. Because  I use the phone for my postings it auto corrects. This causes words to change which are completely wrong for the subject. Stad can attest to that as he had to correct a number of my posts. Why hasn't he corrected this then!

The Crumb blames his phone, he blames the Hutt's editing and even blames learning 'other languages' (presumably of the wrong type!) for any errors he might have published [as fact], in English! It's a poor workman who always blames his tools, and I did predict he would, didn't I? Because he always does; making it up as he goes along.

The very Salatious B Crumb must be the only man in the known universe who owns a mobile 'phone which changes long, complicated compound words with a single meaning (condescending) into meaningless gibberish (see 'condescenting' below) the only 'phone known to all mankind which changes countries and/or nationalities to lower-case! Too fucking funny!

The only 'phone which deletes words, repeats words twice and invents new words, it's beyond too funny, it's fucking risible!

Nobody else has problems uploading to their blog with their phone, none of the of the other non-English speakers have a problem with English like Crumb (or the Jabbering Hutt), it's laziness pure and simple. They can't be arsed with a spell-checker or a rich-text editor, they can't be arsed to learn as adults; just like they can't be arsed with facts!

Although I ignore the blue wiggly-line on 'arsed'; probably because I'm an 'arrogant' Brit!

Because of this I am very willing to accept criticism about my grammar.  I do find Hugh’s comments  however very condescenting and bordering on if not [actually] racist. 

If he can talk it, he can write it, if he talks several languages he knows the universal rules! Crumb uses the language excuse I said he would months ago - no excuse for laziness, and people with multiple language skills (as he claims to have) just don't make basic errors in any language as the rules (for capitalisation/lower-case, punctuation, space bar etc...) are the same!

I actually attacked the laziness of his efforts with grammar at the end of my piece, this is where he should be addressing his monumental falsehoods over the Blue Box Australians and while he is now admitting it was a comment - not an eMail; he's actually skirting the main issue!

Very willing to accept criticism - Errr....except when he's not!

Condescenting - Is that when you can smell someone making it up as they go along? Priceless!

Racist - How? Bwaahahahahaha! Where does he get this shit?

Erwin Sell versus Hugh Walters - Blue Box - Part One - Another Attack.

Hugh continued his  attack with these comments.[unnecessary text change] “Now . . . There’s a picture of the chap on the Internet, he looks about 45, and it was taken a couple of years ago. If Blue Box closed their first factories in the ‘mid-1980’s’ to transfer to the initial Chinese plant (of three), he would have had to have visited the first to close before it closed . . . ie, sometime around his 12th/15th Birthday! Concluding his HK Blue Box factory visits before he was 25 . . . he started commenting on toy soldiers, on-line, in around February 2014, registering his website in June of that year.”

Erwin Sell versus Hugh Walters - Blue Box - Part One - response [should be bold?]

Hugh got a number of items wrong.  I am not 45 years old, I am 43 years old.  The photo on my facebook page is 7 years  old. There are many pictures of me on Facebook  and  Stadsstuff page. The most recent photo of me was in November of 2016 on Stadsstuff. I am much younger than most collectors in this hobby as I constantly mention all time. ['constantly' and 'all the time']

Still not addressing the 'meat and two veg' Crumb then spends some time explaining he's TWO WHOLE YEARS younger than I estimated he was "...about...".

And why the fuck would I be on his facebook page? The pictures are on Stad's; the idiot! I 'assume' he is the sort to skulk-around on other people's Facebook so he 'assumes' everyone else does - we don't, fuckwit!

I would like to take this opportunity to apologise here and now, unreservedly to Mr the Very Salacious B Crumb, the Hutt that Jabbers, the entire membership of the Pennsylvania-State Toy Soldier Mafia and / or all or any other toy, toy soldier, toy figure or novelty collectors worldwide, alive or dead to whom it may concern; for my being nearly 5% out in estimating Erwin Sell's age from a seven-year old photograph, I shall [probably] rend my garments asunder and wear sackcloth and ashes for 40 days and 40 nights by way of penance for my total and utter lack of accuracy in the matter of my guesswork. No I fucking won't; I might have a chuckle in the bath!

You can't invent this stuff (actually; Erwin Sell can!), idiots just make it happen.

As my original argument was that my estimate made him too young to have seen the figures he was claiming to have, in the factories, he was claiming to have . . . he's only reinforcing what I was saying - in other words: a fuckwit!

And by his angry admission he must have visited the first (of the three) factory when he was 10, to witness figures that were out of the shops about five years before he was born at the latest? Fuckwitted fuckwit!
How does he define 'this hobby', I doubt there's many on LRG over 50 with a fair few still in their thirties! There's an arrogance to where HE sees himself in the hobby.

Second I have been writing and talking about toy soldiers and toys in many blogs since 2005 [citations needed], I have posted on blogs in Italy [citations needed], Spain [citations needed], South America [citations needed] and United States. So where did Hugh get the idea  I just started in February, 2014.?

He claims comments all over the web, but provides no links? Cum'mon turd, prove me really wrong or stop making up as you go along! Dated/dateable screen-capcha's or links now! All those foreign-language skills and he still can't write English?

If you are talking about Stad’s blog, that [which] I started commenting on Stad’s blog in January 20, 2014. I had contacted Paul Stadinger regarding  the Own figures I had uncovered. He was [the] only one I found [who was also] aware of these figures.

He didn't 'uncover' Own, they were/are recent/current production...hold on, I just saw a new Land Rover out of the window...I hereby claim credit for 'uncovering' the new Land Rover, let me on a new car Blog! Fuckwit!


So once again you got your information wrong? Did you read the other blogs I posted in? [citation needed]
Well - I didn't really, did I? All the comments I know are from 2014-on - 54mm chap's Blog, Fantasy Blog, Treefrog, Stads? They must be some specialist, esoteric Blogs he's been commenting on, he's not on either of the worthwhile South American blogs; I've been following them since before Stad had a Blog - no Erwin there, so fess-up with the evidence turd! Or have they all 'gone'? The waybackmachine will still have them . . . Links please, now!

'So once again' - You have yet to prove I've ever got anything wrong, though I'm sure I have, it's not in relation to you and your wittering! So it's not even once yet, let along 'once again'!

Although to be fair, I should have put 'to my knowledge' before or after "he started commenting on toy soldiers", that's my bad and I'm happy to 'fess-up. Lack of due diligence!

I'll correct the post with my usual dated salmon-pink, so people know I've added to the wording on such an important post, while we wait for him to provide tangible evidence of this earlier activity.

All I can say you  you [delete duplicate word?] can not assume Hugh [punctuation] -

Remember; dear reader - "you you can not assume Hugh", you you can assume death and taxes, but don't you you assume Hugh; it might be Dave!

Erwin Sell versus Hugh Walters - Blue Box - Part One - Another Point [should be bold?]

My correction was a private email [citation needed].  In my email I did not call you wrong (err...yes you did and I quote "The Aussies listed as BB original are not BB") or a liar. I was offering you a way to  correct an error or not (no you weren't you were stating me to be wrong). If I was wrong or not Hugh could had have easily discussed it in a private email as I did (-n't). [Correct tenses]

No private eMail, There's NO private eMail, stop making it up as you go along!  - provide screen-capcha please? Fuckwit.

And why would I chose to argue a point in private, which was published by the make it up as he goes along Crumb; in public - twice?

But Hugh decided to go for a full scale blog rant (wasn't it brilliant? 12,260-odd words you know! Forensically de-constructed, with empirical evidence, from his own quoted words). Inciting the idea that I had wrote in your blog the above private email I sent to you. [not English, tense change, consider rewriting]

It's still on the Blog the fuckwit! Where he posted it, the fuckwit! In the 'comments' box under the post, the utter, self-deluded fuckwit! LOOK; HERE - his comment - what a fuckwit!

Erwin Sell versus Hugh Walters - Blue Box - Part One - Hugh’s next attack
Here is what  Hugh Said

“Now had the rotten garbage stayed on Stad’s Stuff I would have ignored it, but as he had dismissed my work on that Blog and then come straight over here and repeated his nonsense I’m afraid I’m going escalate this one, somewhat! Not least than because in the last few months he seems to have moved up a gear in the bullshitting stakes, and become an annoying ‘shadow’ to this Blog, as well as attacking Plastic Warrior twice recently.)) (what's with the double brackets? Some crazy Cuban-Russian punctuation perhaps?) ((And understand this – I’m not unfairly judging some innocent trier; weighing his sweated efforts against my poncy, liberal, middle-class, sensibilities. I’m pointing out the rank hypocrisy of a man who came to MY blog and told ME that MY figures weren’t what they actually ARE.” [Separate quotes properly]

And I stand by every word! Pity the message was lost on this pair of bumbling fucktards!

Erwin Sell versus Hugh Walters - Blue Box - Part One - Where do I Start

Wow, where do I begin. (he began a while ago; we're over half way through the post, but he could try addressing one of the questions over his figure-bullshit!) So how did I become an annoying shadow to your blog? Please give hard  examples.  Likewise I have never posted in your blog?   I send you an email .That was it! [unnecessary text change]

Oh Christ wept on his Birthday for the state of Erwin's brain . . . he's like a child, if he was in the room I'd be looking at 10-20 for justifiable homicide due to provocation! But the jury would probably let me off on the 'humane mercy-killing' defence!

There was/is no and never has been any eMail from the Crumb to me - he commented ('posted' a comment) directly to my blog, shortly after attacking the same post [of mine] for inaccuracy, on Stad's Stuff.

A man who so far has said I'm wrong about everything I said in my empirical breakdown of his bullshit, who is skirting the issue of the Australians and who has provided no 'hard examples' is demanding them of me! It's farcical really.

I will deal with the shadowing/plagiarism and such-like in a separate post as it requires a lot of research of both blogs and several screen-capcha's, and it needs to be addressed to the Jabbering Hutt as the instigator of this war, and the throne behind the power, as it were!

So what is this about attacking PW? Are you referring to the Red Box toys brand listed incorrectly as [being the] same as Blue Box?   I made a correction on that  subject in Plastic Warrior [citation needed]. Plastic Warrior is open to corrections.

So what is this about attacking PW? - I think he had three digs at PW last year, one - possibly two - on Stads, one on Treefrog (the latter helping to get him blocked, he also attacked Engineer Basevitch and Weston's Toy Soldiers in the same sentence!)

I haven't mentioned his letter to PW (what letter? Fuckwit), his attacks on (or more accurately 'digs at-') PW however exist and remain inaccurate as Redbox and Blue box ARE sister brand-companies of Tai Sang. He need to stop making it up as he goes along! I quoted one of the attacks, so pretending he doesn't know the reference is more about his PSTSM audience than answering the charges!

I made a correction on that subject in Plastic Warrior - Errr...no you haven't? Citation needed! Issue number? The error was in the Blue Box article in issue number 52 of  Plastic Warrior at page # 4.The information I disagree with was the following.

It's not an error; they are both owned by Tai Sang and used to share a stand at the London and Harrogate Toy Fairs
“Blue Box (also  known as Blue Box and Red Box) are based in Grainville Rd Kowloon still producing toys.” 

Plastic Warrior is over 30 years old; when issue 52 came out that was reasonable journalism, the factories HAVE now moved to mainland China and obtained greater autonomy, but offices are still maintained in Granville Road (not 'Grain' for fucks sake! You can't even plagiarise properly!) for Blue Box Holdings Ltd., and the old Blue Box building in Aberdeen (for Tai Sang)

Also in an article on Blue Box Peter Evans made the same mistake on Blue Box and Red Box being the same company.

They WERE the same company and are both still subsidiaries of - Tai Sang Industrial Company Limited! Jesus wept again for this man's ignorance and stubbornness! There's no mistake, Peter Evans knows more about Toy Soldiers that the Crumb ever will know and is one of the people the Crumb lifts (what little accurate information he has used) his 'knowledge' from.

Erwin Sell versus Hugh Walters - Blue Box - Part One - Red Box  Information

As noted in my letter to Plastic Warrior [about] the [non-existant] mistake. I wanted to clear a minor mistake (that isn't) that was all.  I could have mentioned much more.  This what I could have added the following: [rewrite - not English]

As it (his 'letter') hasn't been published up to issue 165 (current issue) this is the Crumb making it up again so he can have some supporting 'evidence' for the PSTSM, even though most of them subscribe and know he hasn't had a letter published?

He has had one article published, sometime after claiming "In [the] past PW magazine has published several of my works/finds base on it and else." [note: 'and else' again - it's his; not mine!], and given everything that's transpired, some of the details in the article must remain suspect until empirical evidence comes to light proving his 'facts' one way or t'other


[Now this (below) is where the 'shooting-fish-in-a-barrel' which - I think you'll agree the post has so far presented to me, descends to a farcical level that is beyond parody! Remember that the last few paragraphs above have been arguing that there's no connection between Redbox and Blue Box.

The pair of them are now going to present evidence to the complete contrary, while sticking with the 'not related' line. On one level he's trying to give himself wiggle-room to claim that's what he meant all along 'and x else' (presumably in later parts hoping we'll forget this - another lesson he's not learnt from my 12,000-worder) but on another level you have to question Crumbs sanity (ironic given some of the comments from PSTSM members about mine, that follow the posting), AND The Jabbering Hutt's judgement - in going along with all this.

It's further instructive as to the nature of the commentators below the post as clearly they haven't read this properly or comprehended it, and are only attacking me because the Great White Bitch-Queen; the Jabbering Hutt has told them to?]

As posted in the RED BOX TOYS talk

Only relationship that exists [between] with a name BLUE BOX & RED BOX was a distribution centre address registered in HK and closed long ago.

Here is the link direct from a directory listing of Businesses and Companies registered in Hong Kong


And the fact that Chi Kong 'CK' Yeung remains - as of today's date - president, director or chief executive of all three - Tai Sang being the third! The Crumb is quite literally more fuckwitted that Old Fuckwit the God of Fuckwits!

This is what the Crumb wrote back in the summer;

" I think the construction black color guy is from RED BOX brand bag set…
RED BOX is a 1985.Was original funded in HK and united with others from other toys line in China after 90’s. It has been BLUE BOX main competitor since from china market.
It has “”wrongly mentioned”” as same or part as Blue Box companies in PW magazine incorrect. They are two complete different companies …
BB and RB are only original funded HK companies still in existence with out interruption and Chinese family owned till today .BB been much older of course in 1957
RD now produced most action figures and articulated learning toys most.
"

They ARE in fact sister-brands of Tai-sang Toys, albeit with increasing autonomy.

He wants people to believe that one of probably, what? 50? Subsidiaries and/or departments of Tai Sang over 50 years opened and closed at given points without there being a relationship between two other subsidiaries  of Tai Sang - both of whom are listed in the referred-to one's title?

You can't argue with someone presenting such flawed logic, you can only keep pointing-out to people that the self-deluded fantasist makes it up as he goes along. It's way beyond fuckwittery!

All Red box old links clearly show no relation in address and else with BLUE BOX.

Not 'all' I've clearly found and posted links that do show the relationship, it doesn't have to be an address, is he making it up again to build-in wiggle-room, I think he may be? Note 'and else' again!

Where is the information that shows BLUE BOX -RED BOX as one company still in business [in] HK?

Who said this was about now? This was about the Crumb questioning PW articles about 1970 companies, while wittering about 1960's production and stating "RED BOX is a 1985.Was original funded in HK and united with others from other toys line in China after 90’s" whatever that means, but it's clear what it's trying to say.

Here we have a man I've accused of making it up as he goes along, now starting to manipulate the debate to both support the line he's taken and still claim to be right, while failing to provide supportive evidence and - indeed - providing evidence that argues against the line he's taken!

And yet, despite saying he would start at the beginning, we await his explanation of the Australian debacle, while he gets bogged down in one of the last points on my 12,000-worder, it's as if he's running scared?

The RED BOX FACTORY is registered from 1980’s at a completely different address from BLUE BOX
Here from [a] Hong Kong official (actually Japanese!) (ministry of Health and labor-Welfare ) official [delete duplicated word?] site as [is an] update as till 2015.

See [also] all [other] address included ARCO-(That you Hugh mention does not exist in HK) listed as well .Enjoy!!


When have (oh Christ, we've switched to bold for some reason - this pair of numpties aren’t actually in control of their Blog tools are they!) I ever said Arco didn't exist in Hong Kong? He really needs to stop making it up as he goes along! I actually said in my 12,000-worder "Blue Box's main competitor? Cattle-crud! What about [alphabetically] Arco...", but equally Mattel wholly absorbed Arco in 2007 (I think - without checking . . .'97? It's a 'late' xxx7 anyway!).

So this list of a few companies some of which don't make toys, others defunct,  is a little random for whatever conclusion he's trying to draw from it I fear - A full list of HK based toy companies as of 2015, should run to somewhere between 600 and 2000 companies ('ballpark' without days of research), but it only lists 300-odd, some of which (Kentoys) are UK importers, others (Arco) are long gone, while a few seem to be in other industries altogether (Triple-A Noodles!)? So whatever this list represents it isn’t the evidence of anything he's presenting it as.*

I'll just run that past you again: he has found - on that Interwebbly thing - a random, short or incomplete list of 300 Hong Kong-based firms, with both toy and non-toy companies, some of which have been defunct for some time, mostly in Japanese, on a Japanese ministry web-page (which he thinks - and states - is a HK-Chinese ministry!), and he wants us to draw what conclusion - exactly? Fucking joke, he's an absolute fucking joke!

Exactly! You see what I'm up against, too dumb, TOO FUCKING DUMB for special-school!

Dot-Jay-Pee - it's not rocket science!

*I assume (yes - I'm openly declaring assumption again!) it's a list of HK companies given some sort of hygiene, QA or import/export clearance by the Japanese ministry - over some time? If you click to the 'English' option, you get sent back to the homepage, and can't then navigate back to the list, I suspect the list is an old archive / filed page, which just happens to come up on Google with whatever search-term the Crumb was using.

Grainville Rd in the Kowloon Peninsula [spelling] tip or cape is a very large (larger than a bus? A bag of shopping? How large?) and long (longer than the M1, E6, I66? How long) road full of businesses. Many of [the] main toys companies are located on  the same road. Still that does not mean they are at the same location.  I have visited this area many times. This area has many museums and eating places (says Google!) I visited when [the] company I had worked [for] sent me to China.

I know; I covered this (or the similar Granville Road!) in Rack Toy Month, glad he took it on board! Indeed I seem to remember it was instrumental in disproving some other piece of shite he made-up as he went along? If he took more from me and less from random Japanese web-pages, he'd be a slightly more convincing fraud!

Erwin Sell versus Hugh Walters - Blue Box - Part One - My Final Thoughts

My purpose as I said that we get the right information for our hobby [rewrite, tenses]. I am not out to hurt anyone. I am open to a good discussion.  However I  do not appreciate a person who responds with lies (we're waiting for you to prove one lie of mine, or disprove one of yours - the Australians?) and  foul language (fucking cunty-bollocks! The withering little daisy needs to man-up a bit!).  Hugh states in his the introduction to f his site that he ha is aspergic.  Aspergic for those who are not aware  Here is what one said about it. [rewrite to make sense, lose cap H, spacing]

One what? One seagull? One turd? One tree; or one snivelling, opinionated fuckwit on Yahoo Answers? Oh, yes! One o'them!

 “Derives from Asperger’s syndrome, which is descriptive of someone with a wide range of disabilities including the uncontrolled impulse to let out inappropriate comments or expletives .The term ‘aspergic’ is derivative and is used by people to describe their habit of using swear words and other rude words perhaps to shock or maybe as a result of having the genuine syndrome. In my experience, those who claim to be aspergic are usually looking for attention.”

This classic 'Internet expert' is actually quite accurately describing Tourette Syndrome, the fuckwit! And again it's a measure of the Crumb that he finds evidence to fit the angle he desires rather than going to an official autism or medical website? Takes a fuckwit to find a fuckwit!

I am sorry to hear that you have this problem.  However you can use it as a crutch or overcome it.   I appreciate people that overcome their problem. 

So - having accused me of racism for wondering at the nature of an apparently anonymous, apparently illiterate commentator on my Blog, he thinks (as do the commentators below his post) it's OK to be fucking patronising to someone he knows to be (or suspects of being-) mentaly disabled! Pot, Kettle and Fuckwits Batman! - someone's gonna' get burnt!

I've never used it as a crutch (actually I just did - lying cunt - but it's a first!), and I overcame it by not knowing about it - in the Army, on the road, at Uni....! It was only diagnosed (by a DWP County Work Psychologist) when I was 47 and I swear because I chose to - the hypocritical, patronising, cum-breathed, little-dunderheaded, cunty-bollock of a mother-humping, shit-for-brained, cock-sucking, pissy-odoured, fuck-puppet!

Erwin Sell versus Hugh Walters - Blue Box - Part One - Comments

Look out! The Jabbering Hutt's back to swing his oar again !

We (It's that 'Royal We' again which the Crumb hates so much but uses as frequently as his mentor!) welcome any comments on this subject.  We will edit or delete any comments that are not professional or use foul language.  I was accused of  deleting comments to protect Erwin over the mounted Hong Kong Trojan firing the bow.  In this matter if I edit or delete a comment it will be saved first in a file. This file will be available for anyone who wants a copy.

Censorship - that isn't . . . brilliant! Some sort of fucking genius working the Stad's Stuff shift on the 17th huh? If I've understood it right - anyone can say anything in comments, the Jabbering Hutt will publish those he likes; the rest will only be available via request? Presumably to his 'very great friends' and members of the PSTSM! You just cannot invent this crap - from the land of free-speech cometh err...not so free speech, by request!

What is this PSTSM? Some secret society of masturbatory fantasists who get off beating their meat to withheld comments? Fuck; they are killing me here with their funny little ways!

Who accused him of deleting comments on the Trojan post? He probably did, he certainly deleted a few when the Crumb went into meltdown on the Blue Box wagon post. AND . . . he's deleted every comment I've ever tried to make!

Even the first one which was trying to say thanks' to Wayne for his kind words on the MPC Mini's link-back? The others have - it's got to be said - become increasingly irascible, if only because I know he's the kind of two-faced paleface who'll read them all!

Professional - This is two funny, what? Are we all museum curators now? We blog mass-produced plastic-shite. It's like the Keystone Cops cornering on three wheels; watching these two spring into action!

Pictures show the PW edition #52 page number 4 were RED BOX-BLUE BOX mistake was posted. [unnecessary text change]

It wasn't a mistake you thick-arsed plonker!

Other photo show a 1981 HK Toy fare advertise where clearly show Blue Box And Red Box as two entities with separated address and name plus factories .In this case showing the RED BOX factory in Singapore and Blue Box from Hong Kong.

Errr....no it doesn't, it shows the Aberdeen Blue Box factory (top left) also HQ for Red Box and Tai Sang (among others) who still hold offices there and what looks like the Blue Box Toa Payoh facility in Singapore. There's no Red Box factory mentioned OR shown and the showroom address makes no distinction between the two - BECAUSE IT'S REPRESENTING BOTH! Fuck! I mean . . . just - Fuck!

This firstly shows that he's been busy Googling since I published the 12,00-worder, the Blue Box A-Z entry and the Redbox follow-up in a News, Views . . . it also shows he has no ability to defend himself against my accusations of both bullshitting and plagiarism as he has no concept of the truth, nor the ability to see when he's shooting himself in the foot.

Then secondly that both brands are (or were between the mid-1960's and at least 1981) the same one, sharing factories and showrooms under the auspices of Tai Sang (who, when I published, I thought had been wound-up in the 1960's - hence the News, Views follow-up!), although now both have greater autonomy.

While BLUE BOX  Singapore main factory installed in 1968 and closesd in 2003.Located in Kallang Industries State-Singapore with also a smaller factory [and/or] distribution centre  in 615 Blue Box Toys Factory Lorong 4 Toa Payoh, Toa Payoh, Singapore 319516

Yes I published most of this in the autumn - while accusing him of being an argumentative, phoney, plagiarist, who makes it up as he goes along -  it was all missing from is his 'exposed' Blue Box posts  - his point in republishing it?

It only serves to highlight that what was missing from his original posts - was that which I had yet to publish!

distribution center - I'd love to see his evidence for such a definitive statement, I fear he's making it up as he goes along again! StorHub are a commercial containerised self-storage firm with no connection, past or present to Tai Sang, Red Box or Blue Box, being only the current tenants of a new building on the site previously used by Blue Box?

also a smaller factory  - Toa Payoh was almost certainly the larger facility! Evidence to the contrary, stinky-bollox?

And main sales offices in Singapore at
BLUE BOX Singapore office.
Manage by Connie Chan.
  • Tel 64555322
  • Fax 64555922
  • E-Mail connie.chan@tectronmfg.com
Yes I published most of this in the autumn - while accusing him of being an argumentative, phoney, plagiarist, who makes it up as he goes along - it was all missing from his 'exposed' Blue Box posts  - his point in republishing it?

It only serves to highlight that what was missing from his original posts - was that which I had yet to publish!

Sorry - am I getting repetitive? That's because he's getting repetitive! Connie Chan and that [possible] sales office seems to be at best only an agency or subsidiary, or - more likely - totally unconnected new tenants (Tectron Developments Pte. Ltd.)) so was left off the A-Z entry; needing its own entry - if it turns out to have any connection with toys whatsoever - the fuckwitted fuckwit's fuckwitted-fuckwit!

He's getting there now, definitely getting there; shit - he's almost right on at least a first bit of it, but only after I publish, and only as catch-up, none of this stuff was in his 'exposed' Blue Box posts and he was telling the PSTSM there was only one Singapore factory! No doubt he's weaving-together that particular lie's explanation for part two (?) as I write (20th Dec. 2016)!

[404-error - no image]

[404-error - no image]
Image - Vectis

Proves me right in the 12,000-worder? And - of course - they stole the image from here (where it's described as  a Blue Box/Red Box catalogue) without credit or acknowledgement or a link-back. Fucking thieving, lying, dishonest crook-fuckwits the pair of them - and you will recall I pointed him to those auction results (with link-backs/proper credit) when I chewed him out last time...Oh God! I'm teaching the fucker to lie better!

Well; if the best; the very best he can come up with after over 8-weeks (two months) of 'plotting' his [their] revenge is a catalogue showing the Red Box logo with two Blue Box factories and a central/joint-company sales address, my work is done!

===============================================================
===============================================================

Part 1b - I get bored and repetitive but can't be arsed to edit it any tighter!

But my work is never done, and while I'm not ready to update the main Blue Box entry in the A-Z, or write the Red Box and Tai Sang entries, later today I will post some of the edited stuff Erwin doesn't appear to have found in the several months he's had to sort out his rebuttal/kick-back - he'll use it as 'his' in the future of course!

We've actually got to the end of their puke-bucket of illiterate, yet expected temper-tantrum, these are two unpleasant, vindictive, stupid, illiterate, shameless bully-boys at the head of the Penn-State Toy Soldier Mafia** who litter their output with easy kills.

** The Jabbering Hutt has apparently been whingeing off-line along the lines of 'I don't know what he's [me] on about - there's no such thing as the PSTSM?' - too dumb! Just. Too. Dumb. One of the things you get from both the Blog and the comments is a lack of sense of humour among the lot of them!

There's no rhyme or reason, no real structure (just an attempt at following the format of my 12,00-worder), no punch-line, the whole thing from opening title to closing line is illiterate, inaccurate and - most telling - hypocritical, with both their 'aces' nothing more than damp squibs.

2,300+ words so far (it's only 'part one' and they started the silly word-counting thing) and he has only dealt with ONE of the many points I raised in 12,000 words? One might be forgiven for thinking that when he's not actually making it up as he goes along, he's deliberately procrastinating!

And the point he's tried to deal with was a minor point toward the end of my missive and consists of his originally attacking PW's veracity (not voracity!) rather than mine? So the Crumb, supported by a Jabbering Hutt, wishes to spread the fight wider? Too odd, they're both too odd!

And far from proving his point he has shown he
·         Can't tell Japanese from Chinese or interpret URL's
·         Can't read addresses on catalogues
·         Can't accurately parrot back stuff published in an attack on him - as a defence?
Basically and as I suggested last time; that he can't 'do' research and when he finds something he thinks looks useful, weaves a story round it, fills the gaps with other peoples efforts or  bullshit and then gets over-exited if someone questions him!

Do you think they might have moved too soon on this one, they certainly haven't taken the time to polish this particular turd?

Or establish evidence to prove Crumb's innocence of my previous accusations, or check the links work, or check the image-links work, or check image permissions, or check spelling, grammar, punctuation, use of space-bar, bold/normal, font, text size, or embed image-credits . . . .yada yada yada . . then they have the neck to lecture me about professionalism! They are both too stupid to know how stupid they are; little kids playing at being grown-ups.

It's no more that I could have expected after my post on Mr. Crumb's imaginative 'research' and careless pontification, the questions were A) would they rise above it? To which the answer is no, they're just as dumb as me! And B) what did they expect my reaction to be? Sit quiet and hope they'll go away? I'm coming after the little fuckers!

Still - a few points to be raised or reiterated, I've a 12,000 word target to beat!

·         How many fonts?
·         How many text sizes?
·         They copy the style of my article with the direct quotes but then do nothing with them?
·         They make statements of fact without empirical evidence
·         They say I was viciously 'personal' then put my name in the title and tags - Stads rarely uses tags (which WOULD improve his Google SEO), so theirs is actually a MORE personal rebuttal (hypocrites), with an effort to be so after I explained I hadn't put Erwin in the tags?
·         I have now - if that's the game they want to play. And banding my name round like that will only help MY Google rankings - thanks, fuckwitts!
·         Finally Crumb shows both companies on one catalogue cover! Dumb and Dumberer! He actually lacks the mental equipment to see how wrong he's been - and remains! He said they were "rivals" and here they are sharing an (probably Tai Sang funded) artwork - in HIS rebuttal he's proving ME right, you can't make this shit up!
·         Then quotes my published (in the taking apart of his rubbish) info on the various Singapore arms, back at me - inaccurately! To make what point exactly? It's beyond fucking parody!
·         Quotes Kowloon stuff from Rack Toy Month, it's still too funny!
·         "Here is what one said about it", yeah, one opinionated amateur on Yahoo Answers! Try an Asperger's site instead, can we add Yahoo Answers to his repertoire of eBay and Google (and my blog) as his main 'tools' of 'research'!
·         Used "Walters" all the way through when I corrected Stad to that one in about 1995! Rude for the hell of it

It's like he's trying to turn it round so that he was right all along, instead of admitting they are the same company, weren't' rivals, weren’t oldest, weren’t first - which is exactly what I said he does; 'I meant to say...I was trying to say...'

The diatribe published by Paul Stadinger, written (and presumably agreed) by both of them and enthusiastically piled-in on by certain Members of the PSTSM (some of whom are 'new names' and could be assumed to be made-up shill ID's -   is poorly prepared, poorly presented and isn't so much a rebuttal as JUST a rant, they had months to prepare what looks like it was slapped-together by monkeys in a afternoon, from a bucket-full of shit.

It is full of errors, 'evidence' proving the opposite of what it's supposed to prove, dead links, missing images, data published here at the time of, or subsequent to, my rant and a Japanese ministry's webpage described as being HK Chinese!

Yes! My 12,000-worder was ranty. Yes! It was wordy and yes - it got a bit personal at one or two points, but it was reasoned, empirical, had order and had a point and that point remains - wherever you find Mr. Sell pontificating on the Internet, be wary, ask the obvious questions, ask for empirical evidence (where he got it from), don't take him at face value, he'll be making it up as he goes along. And when he's correct chances are someone else published it first somewhere else!

And again, there's lots of misinformation out there, I leave 99.9% of it and the people behind it alone, by which I mean I don't correct it/them directly, because they are simply or innocently mistaken, confused, learning or repeating commonly-held beliefs, mistakes or falsehoods unwittingly, so I just have the 'urban myths' section at the bottoms of the A-Z entries, I even anonymised the Crumb, that will now change - but only in his case.

AND I'm not always right myself but Mr. Crumb is often (not always - and I've never said that) making it up, and there's the difference; genuine mistake against deliberate misinformation.

As to the Jabbering Hutt? A gobshite; he's already fallen out with more people from the hobby than anyone else in the hobby, my turn was as inevitable as night following day - indeed I think he's been building-up to it for several years - fuck'im! He probably hate's that my blog is doing ok, that's all.

Look - here's the stats for the (Christmas) week after they published their clusterfuck of an illiterate knobfest, what it means (for those who don't know Blogger-stats or understand SEO results) is that the Jabbering Hutt managed to get 18 people to directly follow the link back to my blog (from their post), while 28 people in New Zealand directly visited my blog without prompting, and/or then clicked on another page/post.

Now it may be just the one New Zealander, visiting once and then clicking another 28 times ('older post' say), but then it could be just one member of the PSTSM and the point is: I can generate more traffic within the blog, from a virtual, invisible, not-really-real portal in the 'cloud' somewhere over New Zealand than the Jabbering Hutt can send me from his latest post - even by dropping a steaming great turd on his own doorstep and then pointing to me as the cause!

And as to the commentators at the end of the piece? Well, where else do you read them? They are the guys riding-shotgun in the 'Second pick-up truck enters stage-left...', who pile-out and put the boot in, only after the lone runner has been brought down, they are the Penn-State Toy Soldier Mafia and the reason some of those East Coast shows are empty halls.

Yes - I just arrogantly suggested that - in this case at least - I am the 'lone runner'!

Stad's Stuff is basically the PSTSM 's club notice-board and let them continue there until the end of time for all I care. I will continue to do my own thing, here, without a bunch of simpering, simple-minded acolytes ignoring the hypocrisy of their Great White Bitch-Queen or his Kowakian Monky-lizard - I don't have a gang, and I don’t need a gang!

I was a bit disappointed to see Wayne having a dig; he's previously been the epitome of measured neutrality and reason over there, but he seems to be edging off the fence? There's an irony there as well, as I only discovered I couldn't comment on the Jabbering Hutt's about 18 months ago, when trying to thank Wayne for his nice comment on the MPC 'Minis' link-back the Jabbering Hutt posted when I was still a 'very great friend'.

Yet the Jabbering Hutt retains the right and exercises the freedom to come here and comment? Fucking hypocrite! And the hobby is littered with more ex-my very great friend's, than there are "my very great friend"s remaining, perhaps - when it keeps happening to you - you should look in the mirror of your own soul Mr. Hutt!

Likewise to the Crumb, who was busy getting himself barred from a thread (if not the whole forum) over at Treefrog, even as I was editing my 12,000-worder. If you keep putting people's backs-up - fuckwit; you're probably the problem, not them.

Consider the number of links on this very page to other sites, blogs and resources connected to toy and model soldiers, figures and novelties on the Internet, then compare with the number of similar links on Stad's Stuff? I am about sharing; the Jabbering Hutt is about the [how] great 'I Am'; as is his poisonous side-kick

===============================================================

I'm bored with this now and getting quite repetitive, I just can't believe how fucking stupid these two muppets are!

Bugger - only 10,000-odd words, the shit-bags didn't give me enough to work with! Still - There's always part two: Let's see what Tweedle Dum and Tweedle Dumber come up with in what 'we' can 'assume' will be the next, equally thrilling, fascinating, exciting instalment of the game we like to play . . .

. . . Erwin makes it up again!

No comments: