lovecraft68 & sr71plt Please bicker here.

[sr71plt]

I thought that sig line was a reference to what you had said to Safebet.

No, Box, Cruel had a whole breathy, squeally thread about how maybe she had a date with the guy in a room upstairs in her dorm later that day for him to lay her (and we were all supposed to be pleased for her)--and then he stood her up. She sounded naive and needy all at once and apparently assumed we all wanted to know all about it (up to the time he stood her up) so we could be breathy and squeally with her. At the point he stood her up (which raises all sorts of questions about her. A guy in the dorm has the opportunity to spike anything short of a goat and he finds something better to do? Oh, sure.) she wanted both commiserations and a group hex on the guy.

I thought that thread was so wrong is so many ways, and later, when she jabbed me on the maturity issue, I jabbed back with that. And Lovecraft who has been trying to get in her panties himself picked it up as his sig line.

Need it explained more fully?

 

[Cruel2BKind]

No, Box, Cruel had a whole breathy, squeally thread about how maybe she had a date with the guy in a room upstairs in her dorm later that day for him to lay her (and we were all supposed to be pleased for her)--and then he stood her up. She sounded naive and needy all at once and apparently assumed we all wanted to know all about it (up to the time he stood her up) so we could be breathy and squeally with her. At the point he stood her up (which raises all sorts of questions about her. A guy in the dorm has the opportunity to spike anything short of a goat and he finds something better to do? Oh, sure.) she wanted both commiserations and a group hex on the guy.

I thought that thread was so wrong is so many ways, and later, when she jabbed me on the maturity issue, I jabbed back with that. And Lovecraft who has been trying to get in her panties himself picked it up as his sig line.

Need it explained more fully?

No, you seem to have explained how much of a dick you are all by yourself. You know a lot, but shit like this is the reason nobody likes you.

And before you say our opinions don't matter, they have to mean something if you're here in the first place.

Final post on this monster, I'm out.

Kisses SR, I bet even a 'goat' like me gets laid more times in a year than you.

 

[sr71plt]

No, you seem to have explained how much of a dick you are all by yourself. You know a lot, but shit like this is the reason nobody likes you.

And before you say our opinions don't matter, they have to mean something if you're here in the first place.

Final post on this monster, I'm out.

Kisses SR, I bet even a 'goat' like me gets laid more times in a year than you.

Well, you have managed to learn something from Lovecraft and Lance--how to invoke what everybody/nobody thinks.

Your "he's going to do the privilege of laying me" thread is in the forum history for anyone who wants to read it and decide for him/herself. (It's a pretty amusing read.)

I see no reason to compare how often we get laid. That's one of them thar childish games.

 

[lance gt]

Well, you have managed to learn something from Lovecraft and Lance--how to invoke what everybody/nobody thinks.

Your "he's going to do the privilege of laying me" thread is in the forum history for anyone who wants to read it and decide for him/herself. (It's a pretty amusing read.)

I see no reason to compare how often we get laid. That's one of them thar childish games.

Pfffffft

 

[Boxlicker101]

No, you seem to have explained how much of a dick you are all by yourself. You know a lot, but shit like this is the reason nobody likes you.

And before you say our opinions don't matter, they have to mean something if you're here in the first place.

Final post on this monster, I'm out.

Kisses SR, I bet even a 'goat' like me gets laid more times in a year than you.

You are not addressing me, but I must say, you are absolutely right. However, don't read too much into that or take too much credit for it. Almost any straight woman can have a fuller and more varied sex life than almost any man, if she wants it. The bold part is the clue. Most women are just not that much into casual sex, while most men are, which means there are vastly more men available than there are women. I have said this many times, and women here usually pooh-pooh me, but it's nice to see a woman agreeing with me.

 

[cloudy]

Well, damn....some things never change, do they?

 

[Boxlicker101]

Well, damn....some things never change, do they?

There are many things that don't change. Water always runs downhill, the sun always rises in the east and two plus two is always four. There are many other facts that are virtually set in concrete, and I cited one in my last post.

But, what brought about your comment?

 

[PoppingTom]

Well, damn....some things never change, do they?

This is nothing compared to what goes off in the German section sometimes.

"The best writers are utterly disgusting persons most of the time" a famous German critic said one time.

 

[PayDay]

Thanks. The cited guidance starts off, by the way, with this statement:

There is a widespread belief--one with no historical or grammatical foundation--that it is an error to begin a sentence with a conjunction such as and, but, or so. In fact, a substantial percentage (often as many as 10 percent) of the sentences in first-rate writing begin with conjunctions. It has been so for centuries, and even the most conservative grammarians have followed this practice.

So, see what you can learn by making an ass of yourself, Lance (not to mention putting the horse laugh to the "righteousness" of your ragging on me about my writing or writing/publishing advice)? (Oh, look, another sentence starting with a conjunction.)

I can't stand how all these intelligent arguments continually go unanswered.

I haven't even bothered to read the last few posts here, and I am going to do the forum a favor and wander off of this thread.
...
If it were simply Pilot and I 24/7 it could be either of us, it always takes two to tango. And Pilot could call me out for being an asshole and jealous and stupid and whatever else he says.
...
But although I never judge by what others think and try to make up my own mind about people, there is something to be said for the expression where there is smoke there's fire.
...
All of us must be wrong, because he could never be. And I listed just people who openly argue with him. He is on a boatload of ignore pages.
...
If I were Pilot I would run to them and ask them to stick up for me, to defend me, to say "Pilot stop it!" But I won't because I don't care. Unlike Pilot who obviously does.

If I were to put all jokes and ball busting aside and had to say one serious thing about Pilot it would be that I feel bad for him.

It must be tough to be so insecure and unhappy with yourself that you need to constantly tout yourself as better than. Bitterness only hurts the one that harbors it. Pilot is a sad little man who should be deserving of pity, but is too damn annoying to ever get any.

But that is just my take on what I see here, people can choose to take what they want from it.

This thread shouldn't die, as it mirrors the problems of society.

Lovecraft, you are full of shit about being judgemental. Truth. Otherwise, you would have never been on this thread to begin with, and you would not be lurking still. Most of the responses you make are passive aggressive and rhetorical, and you claim they are not, and then blame someone for responding.

Here's what I've seen. Someone says something SR disagrees with. SR (he or she, I don't know), in turn, replies with a questioning response to continue the dialogue and understand the intention (unless the poster is incorrect/misunderstood).

Then someone insults SR's personality, totally ignoring the argument that they could not see due to personal rage.

SR, in turn, brings up the argument again (not in a very nice way, as ignorance causes such). The argument goes unanswered, then someone insults SR.

Then SR retaliates. Then other posters get mad at SR because SR fights back, like he/she is not supposed to or something.

Try holding a dialogue SR, you know, like a person. It works. Quit blaming him/her/it for your poor communication.

Now, to SR: No one likes a smarty pants, even if you are helpful

 

[Boxlicker101]

Lovecraft, you are full of shit about being judgemental. Truth. Otherwise, you would have never been on this thread to begin with, and you would not be lurking still. Most of the responses you make are passive aggressive and rhetorical, and you claim they are not, and then blame someone for responding.

Here's what I've seen. Someone says something SR disagrees with. SR (he or she, I don't know), in turn, replies with a questioning response to continue the dialogue and understand the intention (unless the poster is incorrect/misunderstood).

Then someone insults SR's personality, totally ignoring the argument that they could not see due to personal rage.

SR, in turn, brings up the argument again (not in a very nice way, as ignorance causes such). The argument goes unanswered, then someone insults SR.

Then SR retaliates. Then other posters get mad at SR because SR fights back, like he/she is not supposed to or something.

Try holding a dialogue SR, you know, like a person. It works. Quit blaming him/her/it for your poor communication.

Now, to SR: No one likes a smarty pants, even if you are helpful

Do you see the irony in your first statement?

 

[PayDay]

Do you see the irony in your first statement?

It's only there if you are looking for it.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boxlicker101
Do you see the irony in your first statement?

It's only there if you are looking for it.

What I am saying is that telling somebody he is full of shit for being judgemental is highly ironic.

How much more jedgemental can you get than saying somebody is full of shit because of opinions expressed?

 

[PayDay]

What I am saying is that telling somebody he is full of shit for being judgemental is highly ironic.

How much more jedgemental can you get than saying somebody is full of shit because of opinions expressed?

I fully grasp what you are trying to say, and still stand by my response of: "It's only there if you are looking for it."

 

[Darkniciad]

That's a pretty solid flow chart of what's actually happening, to anyone who takes the time to look and isn't just looking for reasons to hate on SR.

I will add that sometimes the OP misinterprets the response and sets it off without the intervention of a third party -- though third parties will always show up to accelerate the derail and trashing of the topic.

And, sometimes SRs responses do have an air of talking down that naturally causes people to bristle. Doesn't negate that he's answering the question posed in the thread, and far more often than not, correct.

SRs not blameless, but if you look at it without your rage glasses on, most of the time, he's getting gangbanged simply for posting, exactly as he says.

Go through the list of his detractors without those rage-glasses on, too. I think you'll discover that a large number of them are -- at the least -- just as guilty of the nastiness and high-horse behavior they accuse him of. ( Which they're drawing out by attacking him )

The rest probably would have gotten over whatever he said that irritated them if they weren't following the bile spewers like lemmings off the cliff into hatred.

 

[_Lynn_]

That's a pretty solid flow chart of what's actually happening, to anyone who takes the time to look and isn't just looking for reasons to hate on SR.

I will add that sometimes the OP misinterprets the response and sets it off without the intervention of a third party -- though third parties will always show up to accelerate the derail and trashing of the topic.

And, sometimes SRs responses do have an air of talking down that naturally causes people to bristle. Doesn't negate that he's answering the question posed in the thread, and far more often than not, correct.

SRs not blameless, but if you look at it without your rage glasses on, most of the time, he's getting gangbanged simply for posting, exactly as he says.

Go through the list of his detractors without those rage-glasses on, too. I think you'll discover that a large number of them are -- at the least -- just as guilty of the nastiness and high-horse behavior they accuse him of. ( Which they're drawing out by attacking him )

The rest probably would have gotten over whatever he said that irritated them if they weren't following the bile spewers like lemmings off the cliff into hatred.

Yup, what you said.

 

[PennLady]

Dark said it better than I could.

 

[Safe_Bet]

I love how all of you "SR Apologists" ignore the MULTITUDE of times HE comes zinging out of the ether to insult somebody without cause or to initiate "first strike" ad hominem attacks.

He has done that for fucking YEARS! No shit people respond badly when he posts anything! (which also shows Dark's bullshit to be just that).

But what the hell ever. You sycophantic kiss asses are either afraid of his bullying or too invested in his asshole to care, so fuck all of y'all too.

Now have a nice day, fuckwaffles. I'm going to.


P.S. As to ColdDiesel's and LC's comments regarding my sexuality / having sex with somebody who finds the idea disgusting... SERIOUSLY, "boys"???

 

[geronimo_appleby]

I love how all of you "SR Apologists" ignore the MULTITUDE of times HE comes zinging out of the ether to insult somebody without cause or to initiate "first strike" ad hominem attacks.

He has done that for fucking YEARS! No shit people respond badly when he posts anything! (which also shows Dark's bullshit to be just that).

But what the hell ever. You sycophantic kiss asses are either afraid of his bullying or too invested in his asshole to care, so fuck all of y'all too.

Now have a nice day, fuckwaffles. I'm going to.


P.S. As to ColdDiesel's and LC's comments regarding my sexuality / having sex with somebody who finds the idea disgusting... SERIOUSLY, "boys"???

well, i'm gunna spend an hour on the caribbean. then i'm gunna drink rum while laying in a hammock. should be a good day.

tomorrow will be much the same, less the bobbing on the caribbean.

 

[lance gt]

well, i'm gunna spend an hour on the caribbean. then i'm gunna drink rum while laying in a hammock. should be a good day.

tomorrow will be much the same, less the bobbing on the caribbean.

Sounds like a day well spent, Amigo. Hope the bobbing tomorrow is little Chicita's head in your lap.

 

[TxRad]

I love how all of you "SR Apologists" ignore the MULTITUDE of times HE comes zinging out of the ether to insult somebody without cause or to initiate "first strike" ad hominem attacks.

He has done that for fucking YEARS! No shit people respond badly when he posts anything! (which also shows Dark's bullshit to be just that).

But what the hell ever. You sycophantic kiss asses are either afraid of his bullying or too invested in his asshole to care, so fuck all of y'all too.

Now have a nice day, fuckwaffles. I'm going to.


P.S. As to ColdDiesel's and LC's comments regarding my sexuality / having sex with somebody who finds the idea disgusting... SERIOUSLY, "boys"???

I'd love to see a couple of examples of this. I don't think you can find them but go right ahead. If you can then good, but if you can't, you own SR an apology.

 

[jomar]

Ironically, this thread tapped down all those never-ending threads...this place was beginning to look like the Playground, ffs.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Safe_Bet
I love how all of you "SR Apologists" ignore the MULTITUDE of times HE comes zinging out of the ether to insult somebody without cause or to initiate "first strike" ad hominem attacks.

He has done that for fucking YEARS! No shit people respond badly when he posts anything! (which also shows Dark's bullshit to be just that).

But what the hell ever. You sycophantic kiss asses are either afraid of his bullying or too invested in his asshole to care, so fuck all of y'all too.

Now have a nice day, fuckwaffles. I'm going to.


P.S. As to ColdDiesel's and LC's comments regarding my sexuality / having sex with somebody who finds the idea disgusting... SERIOUSLY, "boys"???

I'd love to see a couple of examples of this. I don't think you can find them but go right ahead. If you can then good, but if you can't, you own SR an apology.

I could probably find quite a few but, in the case of Safe_Bet, it's a matter of Pot-Kettle.

 

[sr71plt]

I could probably find quite a few but

Well, then do so--or dispense with the insidious innuendo. This is a posting technique of yours that we can do well without.

 

[Boxlicker101]

I could probably find quite a few but, in the case of Safe_Bet, it's a matter of Pot-Kettle.

Well, then do so--or dispense with the insidious innuendo. This is a posting technique of yours that we can do well without.

Well, here is one where you basically called me a racist, because I do not worship The Big O:

Originally Posted by Boxlicker101
First, is there anything in the article or screed that was not true, or a reasonable opinion, given what is known to be true? There is no reference at all to the race of The Big O. If you were not already aware of it, how would you know it from reading? I hope you realize, it is entirely possible to dislike or distrust a person without having those negative opinions caused by race.

I may be mistaken about this, but I believe Obama is the first president, except for some of the earliest ones, who spent a large part of his childhood outside the jurisdiction of the US.

Go fish. I'm not interested in your (or anyone else's) attempts to find reasons to jab someone just because it isn't politically correct for you to exhibit your racism.

George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, etc., etc., spent most of their lives outside of the United States.

Since I've spent much of my life outside of the United States and made it a point to give my children extensive experience outside of the United States during their childhoods, I don't see an acquired perspective of the world that actually involves the world as being a bad thing for qualifying to be president of the United States.

 

[sr71plt]

Well, true if you call it an ad homiem attack on someone who repeatedly has come up with "birther" types of any-angle-they-can-think-of attacks on our president while obviously trying to avoid facing that they just don't want a black in the office of president.

This wasn't an out-of-the-blue attack on you Box. You have a long history in this sort of from-the-side attacks on a list of topics, including Obama. This was an ongoing exchange on a position you take--and plug away at.

Keep digging for several (one just one--one does not a pattern make) genuine examples of what safe-bet stated.

Or, you could just stop posting your innuendo attacks (your Obama posting example is actually a very good example of what you do here).