Hi Buddy, I am Gagan Pahwa... You are rite this swami is the same prabhakaran and he is thinking that we two are same. He is accusing me that I am using my own ID i.e. Gagan Pahwa to support my another ID, which according to him is "Another Indian".
Swami has replied (the message mentioned by you) to Prabha Karan who is just editing the others messages to a little extent 2 create masala on this forum. The word "Constructive" also has been copied by him from my posting on "Constructive Critisizm" mentioned somewhere below. I also gave him my e mail id for a descent and constructive criticizm, but this guy is sending ab*use in mail also. Just few words for u swami GET WELL SOON!!! :)
Hey guys, this prabhakaran alias swami is a 5 year old kid. The way kids taunt others by calling names as "mental" etc. This guy is calling me mental time and again.
These are low quality jokes prabha, increase your standard and then dare to comment here. Hamare yaha chote chote bachche 1 doosre ko mental kehkar chidate hai, tu kitne mahine ka hai beta...
RE:RE:Prabhakaran is back
by Gagan Pahwa on Mar 08, 2008 01:50 AM
ofcourse prabha is going to win... s/he is more consistent than haydos in making comical statements... Hey prabha, keep it up. Have u seen munna bhai 2. Anyways GET WELL SOON. Also no need to tell me that I am another fool. I know that I am. Be Happy :) keep posting the comedy and make us happy as well :)
RE:RE:RE:Prabhakaran is back
by Prabhakaran on Mar 08, 2008 07:30 AM
why mental?bell ranged for your bed?..ok go and sleep..come 2ow for sure and get some kick..good for your mental problem..
RE:RE:RE:Prabhakaran is back
by Gagan Pahwa on Mar 08, 2008 05:59 AM
Well people study the probability theory during the M Phil also. But how wud u know it, a person, who is failed in class X Maths because of probability.. Hw wud u know it... Regarding mental hospital comment, it shows how literate and bold u r to talk of anything like constructive criticizm...??? GET WELL SOON prabha!!!
RE:RE:RE:Prabhakaran is back
by Gagan Pahwa on Mar 08, 2008 05:35 AM
waise watching movies and watching sports are not mutually exclusive events. (Mutually Exclusive events concept is used in probability) Now u wil try 2 find a link between sports and probability theory. So i would rather say i would rather say in advance that watching sports and watching bolllywood movies and studying probability theory are not mutually exclusive events. GET WELL SOON!!!
RE:Prabhakaran is back
by Prabhakaran on Mar 08, 2008 05:42 AM
Gagan,you keep preparing for your school exams and dont get distracted in the middle after reading probability theories..your post shows you are so confused with your subject and cricket and finally starts to blabber by mixing bollywood,cricket and probability theorey..better find a psycho and consult with him???i got one doubt from the beginning,let me clear now...are you in mental hospital already:):):)
RE:RE:RE:Prabhakaran is back
by Prabhakaran on Mar 08, 2008 05:44 AM
@Gagan..have a nice day in mental hospital..do you want comedies to spent your time there?..i think you dont need that...because you will laugh anyway even there is no comedy:):)..mental
RE:RE:RE:Prabhakaran is back
by Gagan Pahwa on Mar 08, 2008 06:11 AM
Oh prabha, 1 more thing, if u think that i m confused wid my subject of probability theory it means that u dint get the meaning of MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE, it means u have not studied maths even till X std. Hw can u talk something constructive with a guy doing M.Phil Eco.??? Now u may ask the role of probability in economics... Sorry no answer to this, "Bhains (buffalo) ke aage kya Beeen bajana" GET WELL SOON!!!
RE:Prabhakaran is back
by Gagan Pahwa on Mar 08, 2008 05:53 AM
m logging it off... g2g... I wil wait 4 ur mail prabha and i m going 2 sleep now, if u mail me, i may reply late, but i shall reply
RE:Prabhakaran is back
by Gagan Pahwa on Mar 08, 2008 06:21 AM
@ Prabha, u are the same prabha, who was using the term "Grease" instead of "Crease" twice, other nite... Is it wat you call cricketing terminology...??? LOL.... Have u applied the grease on ur face, the motor mechanic prabha...???
RE:RE:Prabhakaran is back
by Ritwik Bhuyan on Mar 08, 2008 10:08 PM
Bell "Ranged"... The second form of ring is "rang" and not "ranged". Ohhh prabha, u should release a new dictionary in ur name... "PRABHA WANKERAN". Anyways, @prabha :-)
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Prabhakaran is back
by Gagan Pahwa on Mar 08, 2008 07:46 AM
Oh, u studied science without maths.. They are not that mutually exclusive anpad aadmi???
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Prabhakaran is back
by Ritwik Bhuyan on Mar 08, 2008 10:11 PM
Bell "Ranged"... The second form of ring is "rang" and not "ranged". Ohhh prabha, u should release a new dictionary in ur name... "PRABHA WANKERAN". Anyways, @prabha :-)
RE:RE:Prabhakaran is back
by Ritwik Bhuyan on Mar 08, 2008 11:01 PM
Bell "Ranged"... The second form of ring is "rang" and not "ranged". Ohhh prabha, u should release a new dictionary in ur name... "PRABHA WANKERAN". Anyways, @prabha :-)
I would rate Gilchrist higher than sachin as a team player and hard hitter...and a more athletic fielder!..he performed almost everytime when the team needed him.
RE:Adam
by Gagan Pahwa on Mar 08, 2008 03:08 AM
u have tried every bit of yours but u could not provide anything solid against sachin. if u stil want to criticize him, u should focus on constructive criticizm rather than throwing stones.
RE:Adam
by Prabhakaran on Mar 08, 2008 05:34 AM
Gagan..if you think your debate supporting sachin is solid,constructive and not just an mere argument to throw stones,then remember the critics about sachin's recent performance is professional and more constructive for the betterment of cricket india.You have tried all your angles and just kept on vomitting his records to prove your side,but that opinion has been strongly refused with all points on his weakness and selfish game..Since that got failed you start to taunt with abuse language.Even for that you got a strong reply..now you have started and you itself decided that you have proven your point and talks very postively thinking that you have achieved your debate positively...man just get a life here...
RE:Adam
by Your Father on Mar 09, 2008 05:25 PM
If not records, then what else you want to judge the talent of a player? I think you would be satisfied with him, only when he would score for India only in Leg Byes. Because, if he plays with the bat, people like you will say that he is selfishly scoring for himself and not for the team.
RE:Adam
by Gagan Pahwa on Mar 08, 2008 05:48 AM
this is the difference between quantitative analysis and qualitative analysis. In, Qualitative analysis, any tom d**k & harry can comment anything about anybody like u r commenting about sachin. But in order to answer critics like u, sachin use his bat to score runs (something QUANTITATIVE). Even if u want to argue on qualitative terms, you can mail me at gaganpahwa dot dse at gmail dot com. You also want to be constructive. Lets be constructive. But not here where everything is mixed up.
RE:Adam
by Ritwik Bhuyan on Mar 08, 2008 10:46 AM
when nothing to say against the great SACHIN TENDULKAR, you have started to copy the tricks of his fans :) GET WELL SOON prabha!!!
