It's been Real!

[JohnDoe]

Just wanted to say goodbye. I need a break from posting here.

It's been an experience that will be hard to forget, that's for certain!

:cheers2:

jd

[82Marine89]

Take care.

[Pale Rider]

Just wanted to say goodbye. I need a break from posting here.

It's been an experience that will be hard to forget, that's for certain!

:cheers2:

jd

What's the problem?

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,

1. Come back and hash it out again.
2. You have some powerful views, that you shouldn't try to hold in.
3. Its okay to vent.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[BoogyMan]

Cheers JD, take care.

[Yurt]

Yeah, get some rest and get back here.

[manu1959]

bye.......take care....:cool:

[nevadamedic]

:( Nooooooooooooooo

[Immanuel]

I'll miss you JD.

Come back when you have had some time to breathe.

Immie

[glockmail]

Sweet and Petite,

Its good to take a break every once in a while, so take care.

Lean and Mean

[truthmatters]

Just wanted to say goodbye. I need a break from posting here.

It's been an experience that will be hard to forget, that's for certain!

:cheers2:

jd

I understand completely and will miss your input. See at the home sight hopefully.

[Hagbard Celine]

You're just going to quit cold-turkey like that? You're stronger than I am. I've been trying to quit for years! :dance:

[Sir Evil]

It's been Real!

Umm, no it was anything but real. Perhaps if you do come back you can post real stright forward opinions instead of beating around the bush. Maybe you can say something without using a religion to hide behind. Maybe, just maybe it can then be considered real.

[OCA]

It's been Real!

Umm, no it was anything but real. Perhaps if you do come back you can post real stright forward opinions instead of beating around the bush. Maybe you can say something without using a religion to hide behind. Maybe, just maybe it can then be considered real.


You and me both Evil, I never believed the Christian schtick that Doe used............ever.

[truthmatters]

I have know JD for years. JD is one of the most devoted christians I have ever known in my life. She is a caring person who has always showed concern for the people arround her. If you have accessed that she is a phoney christian you have merely shown that you are a poor judge of charactor.

[Sir Evil]

I have know JD for years. JD is one of the most devoted christians I have ever known in my life. She is a caring person who has always showed concern for the people arround her. If you have accessed that she is a phoney christian you have merely shown that you are a poor judge of charactor.

Wow that is some conclusion Douche, I wonder if you two might not be of the same political opinion? Hmm, amazing what one concludes of another with the same opinion.

I have seen the way the self named dove treats people when surrounded by her own, if you want to say that I am merely a bad judge of charactor lol, shitbrick, than you go right ahead, it would be of no surprise to me.

[Sir Evil]

You and me both Evil, I never believed the Christian schtick that Doe used............ever.

Seeing through it is not all that hard when you know what you are looking at. Kind of figured that would be an easy one for you. :D

[JohnDoe]

It's been Real!

Umm, no it was anything but real. Perhaps if you do come back you can post real stright forward opinions instead of beating around the bush. Maybe you can say something without using a religion to hide behind. Maybe, just maybe it can then be considered real.

Religion/Christianity is a big part of my life Sir Evil. If that bothers you and you want to ridicule me for this position, then so be it....its been fortold that people like you would.

It's pretty telling to me that it means nothing to you, and that's ok too, to each his own.

I have said plenty on this board without calling religion in to it, maybe you should learn to read or look at my many posts here before speaking out of your rear end?

:slap:

jd

[truthmatters]

Wow that is some conclusion Douche, I wonder if you two might not be of the same political opinion? Hmm, amazing what one concludes of another with the same opinion.

I have seen the way the self named dove treats people when surrounded by her own, if you want to say that I am merely a bad judge of charactor lol, shitbrick, than you go right ahead, it would be of no surprise to me.

The sites me and JD have come from were much more mixed than this one is.

Lots of Republicans and libertarians along with an equal amount of dems.

No1tovote4 runs one of those sights. He is a cool guy and he can agrue a point like a truely class act and has vurtually NO rules on his siite. Its a cool site with people on it I call friends from the full spectrum of political rainbow.
I go there every day.We know each other so well we can almost switch sides and do each others arguement. I come here because I like to see the differing points of view from me. Funny thing is it seems many of you are here to avoid differing opinions. It is sometimes actually hard to get people here to talk the issue instead of mererly going frat boy insult.

JD may not be perfect but I thought that was a whole big part of being a christain to realise we are all sinners?

[OCA]

Religion/Christianity is a big part of my life Sir Evil. If that bothers you and you want to ridicule me for this position, then so be it....its been fortold that people like you would.

It's pretty telling to me that it means nothing to you, and that's ok too, to each his own.

I have said plenty on this board without calling religion in to it, maybe you should learn to read or look at my many posts here before speaking out of your rear end?

:slap:

jd

You cannot have liberal views and be a Christian.............thats a fact. That is how I arrived at my briliant and well thought out conclusion concerning Doe.

[OCA]

Wow that is some conclusion Douche, I wonder if you two might not be of the same political opinion? Hmm, amazing what one concludes of another with the same opinion.

I have seen the way the self named dove treats people when surrounded by her own, if you want to say that I am merely a bad judge of charactor lol, shitbrick, than you go right ahead, it would be of no surprise to me.

Exactly, Truth is so transparent its laughable. If you agree with her you are golden, if you don't you are a neocon.:laugh2::laugh2:

[Sir Evil]

Religion/Christianity is a big part of my life Sir Evil. If that bothers you and you want to ridicule me for this position, then so be it....its been fortold that people like you would.

It's pretty telling to me that it means nothing to you, and that's ok too, to each his own.

I have said plenty on this board without calling religion in to it, maybe you should learn to read or look at my many posts here before speaking out of your rear end?

:slap:

jd

Truth is I do not practice my religious beliefs on a message forum, another fact is that I do not pretend to either. I think it would be impossible for you to find anything where I would say something negative about something the democratic party has done, and then say with my beliefs I could not agree. I do not portray myself as any kind of figure that is religious, I do not portray myself as any kind of symbol of innocence or peaceful being. Thing is I just post my opinions with no bullshit to use later in the discussion so I have a backdoor to pedal out of. Try it sometime miss "it's been real"

[Said1]

The sites me and JD have come from were much more mixed than this one is.

Lots of Republicans and libertarians along with an equal amount of dems.

No1tovote4 runs one of those sights. He is a cool guy and he can agrue a point like a truely class act and has vurtually NO rules on his siite. Its a cool site with people on it I call friends from the full spectrum of political rainbow.
I go there every day.We know each other so well we can almost switch sides and do each others arguement. I come here because I like to see the differing points of view from me. Funny thing is it seems many of you are here to avoid differing opinions. It is sometimes actually hard to get people here to talk the issue instead of mererly going frat boy insult.

JD may not be perfect but I thought that was a whole big part of being a christain to realise we are all sinners?


Oh. Pulease. There have been so many legitimate posts directed at you that are all but ignored. You have yet to answer my question about Adam Smith as well as a few others. :poke:

I think you only read posts that have insults in them so you can cry about it. If that's not the case, then why do you ignore sincere posts and basically only respond to those insulting you? I dare you ignore all threads with insults directed at you and to only answer posts that attempt to engage you in serious discussion.

[OCA]

Funny thing is it seems many of you are here to avoid differing opinions. It is sometimes actually hard to get people here to talk the issue instead of mererly going frat boy insult.




Uhhhhh wrong.

You simply avoid all facts which disprove your point of view, you cherry pick articles to support your point of view and then play stupid many times in order to muddle a topic in which you are losing.

Did I miss anything?

[Sir Evil]

Oh. Pulease. There have been so many legitimate posts directed at you that are all but ignored. You have yet to answer my question about Adam Smith as well as a few others. :poke:

I think you only read posts that have insults in them so you can cry about it. If that's not the case, then why do you ignore sincere posts and basically only respond to those insulting you? I dare you ignore all threads with insults directed at you and to only answer posts that attempt to engage you in serious discussion.

Near perfectly said, I might add her ignorance when it comes to actually answering question that she claims to be the truth. Can't count how many times I have seen her let a point go so she could simply avoid being called on the truth. :rolleyes:

[truthmatters]

And Now starts the bit about how I dont answer every question asked of me by dozens of posters who very rarely answer my questions. I am but one person and you have very few people of my political beliefs on here because of how you respond to real debate. I have a full life and love to talk politics but my time on here is limmited compared to the dozens of posters who ask me question when added togerher.

Note I managed to not call anyone a petty name in that response.

[Sir Evil]

And Now starts the bit about how I dont answer every question asked of me by dozens of posters who very rarely answer my questions. I am but one person and you have very few people of my political beliefs on here because of how you respond to real debate. I have a full life and love to talk politics but my time on here is limmited compared to the dozens of posters who ask me question when added togerher.

Note I managed to not call anyone a petty name in that response.

Real dabate? lol, You claim something to be the truth, someone asks you about it, you say read it right there in the article you post, one looks at the article, and can not find a single shred of evidence of what you report to be the truth, and then asks you to point that out, your response " it's in the article"

Dumb as a fucking rock!

[OCA]

And Now starts the bit about how I dont answer every question asked of me by dozens of posters who very rarely answer my questions. I am but one person and you have very few people of my political beliefs on here because of how you respond to real debate. I have a full life and love to talk politics but my time on here is limmited compared to the dozens of posters who ask me question when added togerher.

Note I managed to not call anyone a petty name in that response.

Truth, we could pull login times and i'll bet you are top 10 for average time logged in on a daily basis. Very rarely am I here when you aren't.

Your excuse falls flat.................again.

[truthmatters]

Truth, we could pull login times and i'll bet you are top 10 for average time logged in on a daily basis. Very rarely am I here when you aren't.

Your excuse falls flat.................again.

You are but one poster as I am. Now how many others are there here?

[Sir Evil]

You are but one poster as I am. Now how many others are there here?

Brilliant response, and you wonder why one would conclude that you are dumb as a rock.

[Said1]

And Now starts the bit about how I dont answer every question asked of me by dozens of posters who very rarely answer my questions. I am but one person and you have very few people of my political beliefs on here because of how you respond to real debate. I have a full life and love to talk politics but my time on here is limmited compared to the dozens of posters who ask me question when added togerher.

Note I managed to not call anyone a petty name in that response.

Note: I said you don't respond to legitimate questions. You only seem respond to posts that call you names. You claim something then can't back it up.....over and over and over. If you think something is good, you should be able to explain why when it's relevant to the discussion. I challenged you to do so in the future. That is, I challenge you to ONLY respond to posts that stay on topic and offer a back and forth type of discussion. That does include posts where you are challenged as that's not an insult.

[OCA]

You are but one poster as I am. Now how many others are there here?

*holds head in hands and shakes it in disbelief*

[Sir Evil]

*holds head in hands and shakes it in disbelief*

:laugh2:

Really, did you expect more?

[JohnDoe]

You cannot have liberal views and be a Christian.............thats a fact. That is how I arrived at my briliant and well thought out conclusion concerning Doe.

Well OCA, in the simplest of terms, that is just not true....and quite judgemental if you ask me. I have been a Christian, Catholic for the most part, all of my life.

jd

[truthmatters]

Note: I said you don't respond to legitimate questions. You only seem respond to posts that call you names. You claim something then can't back it up.....over and over and over. If you think something is good, you should be able to explain why when it's relevant to the discussion. I challenged you to do so in the future. That is, I challenge you to ONLY respond to posts that stay on topic and offer a back and forth type of discussion. That does include posts where you are challenged as that's not an insult.

Maybe you should go see that everything here people dont agree with turns into a thread calling the liberals names?

[Sir Evil]

Maybe you should go see that everything here people dont agree with turns into a thread calling the liberals names?

And it was never reduced to name calling with the "other" site? Shut the fuck up already ignoramus.

[truthmatters]

And it was never reduced to name calling with the "other" site? Shut the fuck up already ignoramus.

Where did I claim that ?

There is a vast area between never and always.

[Sir Evil]

Where did I claim that ?

There is a vast area between never and always.

The stop fucking crying about it. You pointed it out, I just exposed the truth you refuse to see.

[truthmatters]

The stop fucking crying about it. You pointed it out, I just exposed the truth you refuse to see.


No you pretended I made some claim I did not make. There are no tears in my eyes and I think that inquiry is vastly different than crying. Why is it the right seems to have so much trouble separating those two things?

[Sir Evil]

No you pretended I made some claim I did not make. There are no tears in my eyes and I think that inquiry is vastly different than crying. Why is it the right seems to have so much trouble separating those two things?

I pretend nothing resin head, I simply addressed a comment that you made. You are simply turning this thread into a liberal/republican topic which is very typical when it has nothing to do with that. Lookie here:


Maybe you should go see that everything here people dont agree with turns into a thread calling the liberals names?

So you see, I don't care what political ambitions you have, I still think that you are too fucking stupid to have a simple opinion period.

[Said1]

Maybe you should go see that everything here people dont agree with turns into a thread calling the liberals names?

You're wrong. As I've said, I and others have posted several questions, to you that are on topic and contain no insults. If YOU go back and look, you will see that you basically ignore those who challenge your thinking in a non-insulting manner - or consider the challenge an insult, which it is not.

Actually, I DO know why you behave in this way, but I still give you a chance anyway. I'm not so certain why I waste my time, when I work all day, have a family, take classes at night and have limited spare time. Maybe you could just tell me what part of Adam Smith's book you liked the best and I'll leave you alone forever. :laugh2:

[truthmatters]

I never said I read the Adam Smith book did I?

You see that is why I continued discussing the subject with the person I was discussing instead fo gettting sidetracked by that question. I was in a discussion already when you came along and threw that out. I Did say it was a good book and it is. Its historically significant and has been so recognised since it was written. Now why did you think it was so important that I answer that one particular question?

[Said1]

I never said I read the Adam Smith book did I?

You see that is why I continued discussing the subject with the person I was discussing instead fo gettting sidetracked by that question. I was in a discussion already when you came along and threw that out. I Did say it was a good book and it is. Its historically significant and has been so recognised since it was written. Now why did you think it was so important that I answer that one particular question?

No you didn't say you read the book exactly. However, having said it was good, I thought you might be able to say something specific about it, instead of the generalized gobbly gook you posted above. You could say that about The Count of Monte Cristo and no one would know the difference.

There was no sidetrack. Kathianne bringing up Adam Smith into the discussion was relevant. As was asking you what you liked best about it the book or Smith's theories on economics. Since you obviously prefer Keynesian like policies, I thought it would be easy for you to draw some kind of kind of comparison. But before I wasted my time, I wanted to know if you knew what you were talking about, hence the question. All you had to say was "I didn't read the book, what does that have to do with anything". Then I would have ansered you. Would that have been so hard? Yes. Because it would show that you don't belong in discussions about economics because you don't want to learn.

[darin]

Well OCA, in the simplest of terms, that is just not true....and quite judgmental if you ask me. I have been a Christian, Catholic for the most part, all of my life.

jd


You frequently use that inappropriately, however. a typical mis-use is like this:

You're in a debate. Say..about something social. In the middle of a debate, out of the blue, if somebody says something remotely non-appeasing, you play the Jesus card.

"Would JESUS want you bombing them?"
"Would JESUS want you executing them?"
"Wouldn't JESUS give the beggar money???"

Most of the time, you use that in a very simplistic and extreme way. For instance, if we were talking about professional pan-handlers, you'd play the "Wouldn't JESUS give to the needy?" as if to imply a) the person speaking is NOT a Christian and b)the professional panhandler is in fact NEEDY. It's pure SPIN you put on things. You spin to paint people's comments in the worst-possible light, then try and trump them with the Christianity card.

that's ONE reason people get bothered so easily with some of the stuff you say.

[Sir Evil]

"Would JESUS want you bombing them?"
"Would JESUS want you executing them?"
"Wouldn't JESUS give the beggar money???"



Exactly! Instead of just suggesting:

" I do not agree with bombing them unless it was a order given by the dems"
" I do not agree with execution"
" I agree with JESUS so I can make a point, and hope nobody will call me on it."
:rolleyes:

[Guernicaa]

" I agree with JESUS so I can make a point, and hope nobody will call me on it."
I call out people who agree with Jesus all the time.
Usually because they think they agree with him, but they don't.

[jimnyc]

I call out people who agree with Jesus all the time.
Usually because they think they agree with him, but they don't.

Stop talking about me! I was with a chick once and "gettin busy" and she kept saying "Jesus, give it to me harder".

ok, so that wasn't very funny, and I'll probably end up in hell, just trying to lighten the mood! :laugh2:

[Sir Evil]

I call out people who agree with Jesus all the time.
Usually because they think they agree with him, but they don't.

Your are right about that Obama, many use this to defend a position when they are not actually even sure that what Jesus would agree to would be what they agree to. Few walk the line, others use it for a different purpose. I don't use this at anytime as it would be extremely hypocritical on my behalf. Funny thing is people will argue this point 'til death even though they know they are wrong.

[dan]

Stop talking about me! I was with a chick once and "gettin busy" and she kept saying "Jesus, give it to me harder".

ok, so that wasn't very funny, and I'll probably end up in hell, just trying to lighten the mood! :laugh2:

Jesus!

:D

[JohnDoe]

You frequently use that inappropriately, however. a typical mis-use is like this:

You're in a debate. Say..about something social. In the middle of a debate, out of the blue, if somebody says something remotely non-appeasing, you play the Jesus card.

"Would JESUS want you bombing them?"
"Would JESUS want you executing them?"
"Wouldn't JESUS give the beggar money???"

Most of the time, you use that in a very simplistic and extreme way. For instance, if we were talking about professional pan-handlers, you'd play the "Wouldn't JESUS give to the needy?" as if to imply a) the person speaking is NOT a Christian and b)the professional panhandler is in fact NEEDY. It's pure SPIN you put on things. You spin to paint people's comments in the worst-possible light, then try and trump them with the Christianity card.

that's ONE reason people get bothered so easily with some of the stuff you say.

Darin, you have pointed this out before, and so has Jim, and so has sir evil and because of this and alot of soul searching on it, I have refrained from doing such since then and yet you all keep bringing it up?

And on the Panhandler thread, I did no such thing, did I?

And why is it that you and others can bring up their faith in threads or comment on threads using something that involves your Faith and it is all hunky dorey to the rest of the board, but when I did it, with true sincerity of what I happen to believe being a Christian, stating such beliefs is NOT ok for me? I find this hard to understand D?

And as far as our "going at it" for a bit, I confessed, that you reminded me of my ex-husband and I unfairly made snide comments to you because of this, and that baggage.... and have refrained from doing such, have I not?

I don't know what else I can do and say other than what I have done already, which is to refrain, with the best of my ability to do such...from bringing my Faith in to an issue? Unless of course if someone else is talking about their faith and beliefs, then I see it as a free card to pass GO, on the subject. I may fail at this sometimes because my Christianity is lived and breathed daily, in my life, but I have made an honest effort not to do such anymore, because it has obviously made a few of you pissed about it.

jd

[Sir Evil]

I may fail at this sometimes because my Christianity is lived and breathed daily, in my life, but I have made an honest effort not to do such anymore, because it has obviously made a few of you pissed about it.

jd

Does'nt piss me off at all, obviously the fact that some don't buy into it pisses you off. Oh well, get over it....

[truthmatters]

No you didn't say you read the book exactly. However, having said it was good, I thought you might be able to say something specific about it, instead of the generalized gobbly gook you posted above. You could say that about The Count of Monte Cristo and no one would know the difference.

There was no sidetrack. Kathianne bringing up Adam Smith into the discussion was relevant. As was asking you what you liked best about it the book or Smith's theories on economics. Since you obviously prefer Keynesian like policies, I thought it would be easy for you to draw some kind of kind of comparison. But before I wasted my time, I wanted to know if you knew what you were talking about, hence the question. All you had to say was "I didn't read the book, what does that have to do with anything". Then I would have ansered you. Would that have been so hard? Yes. Because it would show that you don't belong in discussions about economics because you don't want to learn.


I was buzy in a discussion and felt you were just trying to set up a gotcha distraction. It seems to me if you really wnated to discuss the book you would have asked the person who originally touted its merits to tell what they liked about it.

[JohnDoe]

Does'nt piss me off at all, obviously the fact that some don't buy into it pisses you off. Oh well, get over it.... It doesn't piss me off in the least Sir Evil, as I have said, it was foretold that Christians would be mocked and persecuted, I just see it as another Prophesy, coming true.

:cheers2:

jd

[Sir Evil]

It doesn't piss me off in the least Sir Evil, as I have said, it was foretold that Christians would be mocked and persecuted, I just see it as another Prophesy, coming true.

:cheers2:

jd

Foretold? and what crystal ball revealed such prophecies?

I personally think it does bother you, especially when I point out as you have made it very clear to me that it does. Honestly though I don't care either way, I simply treat you the way you treated me, turnabout is fair play. :D

[JohnDoe]

Foretold? and what crystal ball revealed such prophecies?

I personally think it does bother you, especially when I point out as you have made it very clear to me that it does. Honestly though I don't care either way, I simply treat you the way you treated me, turnabout is fair play. :D

The Bible is what you are calling the Crystal Ball.... btw, I just LOVE that song, Styx is an awesome band!!!

:salute:

jd

[Said1]

I was buzy in a discussion and felt you were just trying to set up a gotcha distraction. It seems to me if you really wnated to discuss the book you would have asked the person who originally touted its merits to tell what they liked about it.

I know what she likes about it as we've had that discussion before. However, for reasons that are obvious to EVERYONE, I didn't think Smith was someone you would give any credit. I simply asked you why you thought his theories were 'good' or what part about the book you liked, as it was VERY relevant to the stance you were taking in the thread. It seems to ME that if you thought something was good, you would know why and then elaborate further to support your position within the thread.

Let me illustrate my point for you.....if I were you, my answer would go something like this.."Smith's theories were good in that they changed blah, blah........however, in modern times they no longer hold merit due the fact that .......blah, blah, blah'. Get it? :laugh2:

Anyway, I bet if I go back and revisit that thread, I would see you only conversing with those calling you names and nothing of real substance coming from you either. When someone tries to get you to use your head, you run and hide. :laugh2:

[Kathianne]

I know what she likes about it as we've had that discussion before. However, for reasons that are obvious to EVERYONE, I didn't think Smith was someone you would give any credit. I simply asked you why you thought his theories were 'good' or what part about the book you liked, as it was VERY relevant to the stance you were taking in the thread. It seems to ME that if you thought something was good, you would know why and then elaborate further to support your position within the thread.

Let me illustrate my point for you.....if I were you, my answer would go something like this.."Smith's theories were good in that they changed blah, blah........however, in modern times they no longer hold merit due the fact that .......blah, blah, blah'. Get it? :laugh2:

Anyway, I bet if I go back and revisit that thread, I would see you only conversing with those calling you names and nothing of real substance coming from you either. When someone tries to get you to use your head, you run and hide. :laugh2:Thanks Said, I have to 'spread it around.'

[Kathianne]

Exactly, Truth is so transparent its laughable. If you agree with her you are golden, if you don't you are a neocon.:laugh2::laugh2:

Thanks to a bot, found this thread. The irony of the above post is too good to let it languish.

OCA, gone but not forgotten.

[red states rule]

Thanks to a bot, found this thread. The irony of the above post is too good to let it languish.

OCA, gone but not forgotten.

The truth will not only set you free, but make life easier for others :laugh2:

[jimnyc]

Just great, my eyes got to bleed a second time from reading Truthmatters fucking inane rants. Funny thing is, she claimed we "name called" here and even pointed out another board where she got treated differently. I read and belong to other boards - and I see her calling her the same exact shit she got called here years ago. Some things don't change. She was a lying, ignoring the facts hack when she posted here, and she gets called the same wherever she goes.

A few others posting in this thread brought back some good memories though!

[red states rule]

Just great, my eyes got to bleed a second time from reading Truthmatters fucking inane rants. Funny thing is, she claimed we "name called" here and even pointed out another board where she got treated differently. I read and belong to other boards - and I see her calling her the same exact shit she got called here years ago. Some things don't change. She was a lying, ignoring the facts hack when she posted here, and she gets called the same wherever she goes.

A few others posting in this thread brought back some good memories though!

Yea some things never do change
Hey Jim, any ideas what the "hot couple" has planned for Christmas? :laugh2:

[Gunny]

Just great, my eyes got to bleed a second time from reading Truthmatters fucking inane rants. Funny thing is, she claimed we "name called" here and even pointed out another board where she got treated differently. I read and belong to other boards - and I see her calling her the same exact shit she got called here years ago. Some things don't change. She was a lying, ignoring the facts hack when she posted here, and she gets called the same wherever she goes.

A few others posting in this thread brought back some good memories though!

She's a f-ing idiot.

[red states rule]

She's a f-ing idiot.

But she creates traffic

[jimnyc]

But she creates traffic

Doesn't matter. A traffic accident causes "congestion" too.

[ConHog]

Thanks to a bot, found this thread. The irony of the above post is too good to let it languish.

OCA, gone but not forgotten.

OCA and TM are obviously both idiots; but isn't the above point true of many of us on message boards? We tend to point out EVERY single fault of anyone who disagrees with us, but if a person agrees with us then they can do whatever they want?

I see it all the time on message boards (more so on other boards than this one in this area because most posts on this board are at least somewhat well written.) Someone will write the most inane, illegible piece of shit post and as long as it parrots the "popular" view the poster will be buried in accolades and plus ones, meanwhile someone could write a well written, well though out post and if it isn't the popular opinion that person is booed and labeled a troll or worse.

Then if a person tries to say hey not everything the "other side" does is horrible and not everyone on the "other side" is a horrible person that person gets labeled as a "middle of the roader" as if recognizing that no group has a monopoly on either stupidity or intelligence is a bad thing.

[jimnyc]

OCA and TM are obviously both idiots; but isn't the above point true of many of us on message boards? We tend to point out EVERY single fault of anyone who disagrees with us, but if a person agrees with us then they can do whatever they want?

I see it all the time on message boards (more so on other boards than this one in this area because most posts on this board are at least somewhat well written.) Someone will write the most inane, illegible piece of shit post and as long as it parrots the "popular" view the poster will be buried in accolades and plus ones, meanwhile someone could write a well written, well though out post and if it isn't the popular opinion that person is booed and labeled a troll or worse.

Then if a person tries to say hey not everything the "other side" does is horrible and not everyone on the "other side" is a horrible person that person gets labeled as a "middle of the roader" as if recognizing that no group has a monopoly on either stupidity or intelligence is a bad thing.

I disagree. We've had plenty come here that are good folks, post with respect, and they don't get jumped on. And I've seen some that post agreeing positions, but post like assholes, and they were jumped on by those who agreed. I think it's more of the attitude of the poster than it is their stance. I've never seen a single poster come here, that posted like an adult, with full respect, that was treated very badly because of their opinion. On the other hand, I've seen a bunch that have "parroted" popular beliefs, but posted like assholes, and they were shunned. It's all in the attitude one comes with and how they treat other members.

[red states rule]

OCA and TM are obviously both idiots; but isn't the above point true of many of us on message boards? We tend to point out EVERY single fault of anyone who disagrees with us, but if a person agrees with us then they can do whatever they want?

I see it all the time on message boards (more so on other boards than this one in this area because most posts on this board are at least somewhat well written.) Someone will write the most inane, illegible piece of shit post and as long as it parrots the "popular" view the poster will be buried in accolades and plus ones, meanwhile someone could write a well written, well though out post and if it isn't the popular opinion that person is booed and labeled a troll or worse.

Then if a person tries to say hey not everything the "other side" does is horrible and not everyone on the "other side" is a horrible person that person gets labeled as a "middle of the roader" as if recognizing that no group has a monopoly on either stupidity or intelligence is a bad thing.

Here is your Christmas present and award you worked so hard to earn CH

http://images.sodahead.com/polls/002320291/5249690042_biggest_whiner_statue_1_answer_2_xlarge .jpeg

[ConHog]

I disagree. We've had plenty come here that are good folks, post with respect, and they don't get jumped on. And I've seen some that post agreeing positions, but post like assholes, and they were jumped on by those who agreed. I think it's more of the attitude of the poster than it is their stance. I've never seen a single poster come here, that posted like an adult, with full respect, that was treated very badly because of their opinion. On the other hand, I've seen a bunch that have "parroted" popular beliefs, but posted like assholes, and they were shunned. It's all in the attitude one comes with and how they treat other members.

Jim, this board isn't immune to human nature. Now is it the cesspool known as the scow? Of course it isn't. But also there are very few on here that don't agree with the popular view, so you're going to see less of it here than in a huge board.

[ConHog]

Here is your Christmas present and award you worked so hard to earn CH

http://images.sodahead.com/polls/002320291/5249690042_biggest_whiner_statue_1_answer_2_xlarge .jpeg

Need more proof Jim? Now what in the world in my post deserved that sort of response?

[red states rule]

Need more proof Jim? Now what in the world in my post deserved
that sort of response?


CH hard at work



http://nintendo4ever.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/trooooooooolls-large.jpg

[ConHog]

CH hard at work



http://nintendo4ever.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/trooooooooolls-large.jpg

Merry Christmas RSR

[red states rule]

Merry Christmas RSR

Merry Christmas CH

May Santa bring you a huge dose of humility this holiday season

[red states rule]

Need more proof Jim? Now what in the world in my post deserved that sort of response?

Eh, how about your whiney ass post?

Any further questions son?

[Gunny]

Eh, how about your whiney ass post?

Any further questions son?

So let me get this straight ... someone necro's a post from back when I had hair and you two managed to turn it into a who's got the bigger dick contest?

Correct me if I am wrong.

[red states rule]

So let me get this straight ... someone necro's a post from back when I had hair and you two managed to turn it into a who's got the bigger dick contest?

Correct me if I am wrong.

Yep you are wrong

I was responding to his whiney ass post from 2 days ago

[ConHog]

So let me get this straight ... someone necro's a post from back when I had hair and you two managed to turn it into a who's got the bigger dick contest?

Correct me if I am wrong.

No, you're wrong. I made a comment in a thread, and as usual RSR had to attack. Completely one sided and unprovoked.

[LuvRPgrl]

No, you're wrong. I made a comment in a thread, and as usual RSR had to attack. Completely one sided and unprovoked.

It wasnt unprovoked.
You came in whining about how if you post the popular pov. then..........

Jimny even disagreed with you

and RSR, true to his self, using pics, told you he thought you were being a whiney ass.......

then you attack RSR

so, it wasnt unprovoked, or is he not entitled to his opinion of you in a thread.?
If he thinks you are whining about a topic in a thread, he is not allowed to express that opinion?

You could have responded with; something like "Im not whining at all, Im merely possting ;my thought...."

But as often happens, people with lots of bravado of themselves are actually very insecure. They accomplish many things because they need to fill that hole of insecurity, and are easily angered and often overly sensitive and take things as personal insults whilst a reasonable person wouldnt.

[darin]

what the frack? This Cage material now?

[ConHog]

It wasnt unprovoked.
You came in whining about how if you post the popular pov. then..........

Jimny even disagreed with you

and RSR, true to his self, using pics, told you he thought you were being a whiney ass.......

then you attack RSR

so, it wasnt unprovoked, or is he not entitled to his opinion of you in a thread.?
If he thinks you are whining about a topic in a thread, he is not allowed to express that opinion?

You could have responded with; something like "Im not whining at all, Im merely possting ;my thought...."

But as often happens, people with lots of bravado of themselves are actually very insecure. They accomplish many things because they need to fill that hole of insecurity, and are easily angered and often overly sensitive and take things as personal insults whilst a reasonable person wouldnt.


Oh definitely you are an unbiased opinion here. LOL

[ConHog]

what the frack? This Cage material now?

It would appear some appear dead set on turning any thread I post in into steel cage material.

[LuvRPgrl]

Oh definitely you are an unbiased opinion here. LOL

Oh, IM VERY biased. Im biased against dick head cowards.

[ConHog]

Oh, IM VERY biased. Im biased against dick head cowards.

nm

[darin]

gawd, you guys....it's like 8th grade sometimes.