Quote:
Originally Posted by keats
If you're trying to paraphrase what I said you got it completely wrong. What I said is that the preponderance of evidence in the bio of Donna Edmonsdon makes the claims made above extremely unlikely. Once again I ask, how is possible that the story has held for all these years? Anybody can believe what he wants but gossip is just that, gossip; usually gossip carries its own motives.
|
You need to reread what I wrote. I was agreeing with you. The story about Donna Edmondson has no merit, as it was told by someone who not only has an ax to grind, but has no proof, or even the ability to provide any. At the same time, what Donna Edmondson said about herself doesn't need proof to be believed, as she's the one that would know what the truth is.