Legs, don't walk away

[Petra]

Come back. We can work it out.

Can't we?

[Anastasia Beaverhausen]

Please, Legsy? :(

[freemonkey]

Oh, no. What happened?

[Petra]

I hurt her (not at all purposefully, but definitely thoughtlessly), and she left.

[Plant Woman]

No, no, no. You can't leave Legs, all the plants are going to die.

ARrrrggggggg. We need legs around here. :walk:

:cryhome:

[nvexio]

nooooooooo!!!!!!!!!

[MonCapitan2002]

That is a shame. I hope whatever conflict the two of you had can be worked out.

[Veritas]

Whaaaaaaaat?

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

[yguy]

I hurt her (not at all purposefully, but definitely thoughtlessly), and she left.

You chased her off all by yourself?

Wow. That's one sensitive creature.

I wouldn't be surprised if she hates herself more for being so vulnerable than she hates you for being so "thoughtless".

[Veritas]

Then you don't know Legs at all.

[yguy]

Then you don't know Legs at all.

That's true enough. It's just that I've been on enough boards to find it odd that a thoughtless act by one poster could drive off someone as popular as Legs is here - especially when the offender gives every indication of wanting to make it right.

[freemonkey]

That is a shame. I hope whatever conflict the two of you had can be worked out.
:yeahthat:

[viscousmemories]

It wasn't just pepperspray, but hopefully she's just taking a little break.

[Shelli]

People have asked her not to leave on other threads also along with glomps and hugs on the countdown thread and I can't speak for anyone else, but I know I've PM'd her on the issue showing support. If that's not enough, what is?

[chick]

Just when I had someone to talk to about Jericho. Damn.

[Julie]

I hope legs isn't gone for long.

Legs I'd really miss you if you went away!

[Tanda]

:longing:

[godfry n. glad]

um....can someone clue me in as to what this is all about?

[Julie]

Here godfry I have a nice warm spot on the clueless couch for you. Would you care for a gin and tonic?

[Tanda]

My understanding is that someone on the board really hurt her feelings and she left.

[godfry n. glad]

um...this is not going to interfere with the horse races, now, is it?

[Julie]

I understand getting feelings hurt...its just sad that the rest of us that had nothing to do with it have to lose out on Legs. If Legs really is gone I'll be horrible upset!

[fragment]

I have no idea whatsoever what this is about.

Legs, I hope you decide to come back.

[erimir]

Ummmm...

What now?

[Stormlight]

Legs is gone??? :tremble:

[Watser?]

She seems to have left, though I'm not sure why.

I hope she'll reconsider :deepsigh:

[Shelli]

I think this whole thing has been blown WAYYYY out of proportion. People have outs, that's just life. There's no need for anyone to leave over it though. :unnope:

:allglomp:

[Tanda]

:bump:

[Crumb]

:huggle: Miss you, Legs. :kiss:

[JoeP]

Count me among the ranks of "don't know what happened - but Legs better come back"

[slimshady2357]

can someone post a link and give a poor fellow a clue?

[LadyShea]

can someone post a link and give a poor fellow a clue?

Seems to me that most of the drama did not occur on the forums, but via PM.

[wei yau]

I'd rather that Legs didn't make this decision, I'll miss having her around.

[livius drusus]

Check out page 12 (and as of this morning, page 13) of the Legs' Daily YouTube thread to see the public bits. As I've told her privately, I hope this is just a break and she decides to come back. :sigh:

[Leesifer]

:(

I'm keeping my fingers crossed that we'll get her back.
:longing:

[pescifish]

I hope she reconsidersYeah and soon, please!
...................... :2faces:

[Pendaric]

How do you do those talk bubble things above the smilies?

[godfry n. glad]

Hit 'quote' on the previous post and you'll see.

[livius drusus]

Here's (http://www.freethought-forum.com/forum/showthread.php?p=244115#post244115) a detailed description, baldbantam. :)

[Pendaric]

Thanks very much guys, that's cool
:D

[Legs]

Hi everyone :wave:

I felt I needed to come and explain a few things.

First of all, I want to thank many people for their kind words and support, dozens of PM's and emails and as well posts here on the forum. Also livius for the beautiful flowers she sent me on the weekend :vibes: Thank you so much liv :squeezle:

http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l20/yasat/0-flowers3-1.jpg

http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l20/yasat/0-flowers1.jpg


I don't want to make anyone read my woes, so please do not click the spoiler tag (below) if the pepperspray/TJL situation bores you.



Well you clicked, so don't complain to me if your eyes cross and get stuck that way.

I've had Jesus Lawyer on ignore for a long time, curiously enough I didn't put him on ignore for anything he did or said to me it was this attack on livius (http://www.freethought-forum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=8344) and the :ff: that prompted me to do so. I thought he was cruel and childish and didn't want any further interaction with him. In short I didn't feel he was worth my time or effort.

So, life went on, I didn't see his threads, on occasion I would see his posts when someone quoted him ,but for the most part life is TJL-free. Occasionally he would post to me/at me specifically to complain about me having him on ignore.

A few days ago he posted on a couple of my threads one was the warm & fuzzy thread (http://www.freethought-forum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=10767) where he said this...

"what? another thread with this person's name? i am not welcome here."

Shelli and pepperspray began responding to him and I though 'uh oh' This was a new thread about nice stories in the news, I certainly didn't want a Jesus Lawyer pity party on it.

I PM'd both Shelli & pepperspray right away and asked if they could just ignore his comments on my threads, not feed into his attention seeking.

Also, liv (and correct me if I am wrong,) wrote pepperspray 2 or 3 times and asked her not to feed his martyr complex.

Shelli immediately offered me her support and I think she may have even edited/deleted a post to drop everything. I appreciated that very much.

I did not ask anyone to ignore TJL, just not to respond to his drama queen posts on my threads.

pepperspray, however, decided not to support me, to ignore liv's pleas and instead encourage TJL to continue posting. She PM'd me that I should give him another chance, unignore him and that he had a kind heart etc... she then pointed out that it was pretty well my fault for everything due to what I post (in my own threads) like the sound of music video. I was causing the problems, apparently I hurt her. :scratch:

She then continued - after my PM - to encourage TJL to post and even started a new thread with a parody title of my thread titles, mocking me for having TJL on ignore.

You know what? The ignore feature is an "option" at :ff: it is offered to us for our use and I don't feel anyone, including myself should be mocked for using a forum feature. I don't need anyone writing me to tell me I'm wrong about using a forum feature and I need to unignore someone. I already gave TJL a second chance after he left as Michael1111 and called liv & vm thieves. (http://www.freethought-forum.com/forum/showpost.php?p=156289&postcount=6)

Just the attack on liv, the thief accusation and the way he bumped my Legs' YouTube thread with beastiality today is overwhelming evidence that his heart ain't that kind IMO, of course. You may think it's grand.

When I saw pepperspray's parody/mocking thread title - I withdrew from the forum and I wrote pepperspray asking why she would do that? why would she deliberately go against what I asked.

pepperspray wrote and apologized to me, something to the effect of "I'm sorry what I did upset you - but................ " - and this is a BIG but - she then negated her apology by excusing everything she did, explaining it all away, rationalizing and basically un-apologizing.

It was the worst apology in the history of apologies.

pepperspray also posted a public apology - what? you haven't seen it? me neither because it was buried in the middle of a thread that I can't see because I have TJL on ignore and he is the OP.

liv sent me the link (http://www.freethought-forum.com/forum/showpost.php?p=312756&postcount=2) and I finally saw it.

in my latenight, thoughtless impetuousness, I really hurt someone. And for that, I'm deeply sorry, and more than just a little ashamed of myself.

This is a nice apology, but it is not what was being sent to me privately, it was completely different and I think for public show. I would have loved to recieve an apology like that with no further comments blaming me and excusing actions.

Note TJL's response to this apology and his song dedication "you know you're right" to which pepperspray says nothing, apparently enjoying the little joke between them.

Pepperspray, meanwhile is writing Widget. Pointing out to him that with 'Legs behavior to others on the forum she is being very thin skinned'. Keep in mind this is at the same time as the heartfelt public words.

Widget politely asked her not to contact him again.

I won't tell you her reply to him but it was very close to what she just said a little while ago to me on another thread and involves 4 letter words.


Sorry for the long rambing post, (above) thanks scarlatti for your post today, thanks Tanda for the sweetest signature ever. Thanks liv and vm, Plant Woman, quiet bear, Leesifer, shelli , veritas, I think there are too many names for me even to list them all - but you know who you are.

pepperspray & TJL pretty well sucked all the fun out of posting here for me, so I going to go for a while and have a break. My PM's are open if anyone wants to say Hi - even Yguy :D

Congrats godfry, you won the horse racing. :vibes:

I'm not going to be addressing/responding to replies etc.. I'm just really tired and need a break, so please don't feel slighted if you ask me something or tell me something and I don't respond here. I don't mean to be insulting or cause a problem, I just need a break.

One last thing, Widget has always told me these words

'everybody's different with everybody else"

~ and it's true, someone who you find the greatest guy in the world can be despised by another, much to your disbelievement.

People act differently based on who they are with, your asshole boss might be the most wonderful tender loving husband/father to his family.

I think these words come into play with everyone we interact with in real life or online. Words for thought.

Legsy.

[Ari]

Ah, that was the post I was waiting for before saying something wrong because I have no clue what happened.

A pre-Welcome-Back, when you come back from the break. :)

[Petra]

I defended your right to ignore him.

[Ensign Steve]

Pepper, don't give it another minute's thought. It's not worth it.

:hug:

[Petra]

Correct.

Thanks.

[Shelli]

It sounds to me as if a break is in order for you indeedy, Legs. Rest up and come back as soon as you feel you're ready. You'll be missed. :snuggles:

[Petra]

Also, you have my permission to post the PM messages, in their entirety, the complete exchange.

[lisarea]

Pepper, don't give it another minute's thought. It's not worth it.

:hug:

Seconded.

[Shelli]

Is this where everyone picks sides? If so, count me out. I've had enough of that on forums. :nuhuh:

Why does this even have to be drawn out anymore than it already has when all parties can just go on about their business of enjoying the :fflove: with whomever they want on ignore if need be at the click of a mouse?

I like pepper. I like Legs. I think TJL is an attention ho who couldn't care less who gets hurt as long as he gets the attention he craves. I had him on ignore when I first joined the FF and I do believe he's going back on ignore. :plonk:

[pescifish]

Is this where everyone picks sides? If so, count me out. I've had enough of that on forums. :nuhuh:

Why does this even have to be drawn out anymore than it already has when all parties can just go on about their business of enjoying the :fflove: with whomever they want on ignore if need be at the click of a mouse?

I like pepper. I like Legs. I think TJL is an attention ho who couldn't care less who gets hurt as long as he gets the attention he craves. I had him on ignore when I first joined the FF and I do believe he's going back on ignore. :plonk:I'd second everything you posted, except that last paragraph seems to contradict the first two.

If you aren't into picking sides and if you are into letting everyone enjoy :ff: as they want, then why announce your loyalties so clearly? :sadcheer:

[Shelli]

I've just seen enough of TJL stirring up shit everywhere he goes and don't care to see it anymore.

And don't be mistaken, although I care for others and some deeply, my loyalties lie with what is best for me and it is best for me that I put TJL on ignore. I choose to post this because I want him to know that he's on ignore. He does enough hurting of others and one good turn deserves another. Yeah, I can be that way.

Also, it's just my way to let people know where they stand with me without guesswork. I hate having to guess where I stand with others and respect those who are honest, so I extend the same courtesy.

As wei said about me earlier in the YouTube thread, "With Shelli, WYSIWYG."

ETA: Oh, and if JTL doesn't like what he reads here and has had enough of me, he's free to put me on ignore and enjoy a Shelli-less FF. It certainly won't hurt my feelings.

[D. Scarlatti]

yw, Legs.

all parties can just go on about their business of enjoying the :fflove: with whomever they want on ignore if need be at the click of a mouse?

A more difficult proposition inheres in the desire to start threads that will remain forever unsullied by the presence of the ignored member. That's a much tougher call than simply exercising the ignore option against individual members.

It's one thing where the ignored member is at least posting remotely on topic, and the ignorer may have to, at least, endure the sight of a quoted post. But that isn't what TJL was up to - he was pretty deliberately meaning to foment mayhem, as usual.

I can understand Legs's reaction -- "Uh oh" -- to TJL suddenly turning up in what was pretty obviously intended to be a relatively uncontroversial happytalk sort of thread. "Uh oh" was my reaction as well, when I happened to see TJL's contribution, which, I'm pretty certain, wasn't motivated by anything more than playing the poor, put-upon cock.

Since the subject of the ignore feature has been treated ad nauseam in countless threads, I doubt TJL was raising the well-known fact that Legs has him on ignore in pursuit of further, intellectual debate on the topic in a happy news thread.

But since my own most successful thread in terms of replies here was on the subject of Kraft Singles individual cheese [sic] food slices, I've never personally been in the position of actually discouraging participation in a thread.

As for taking sides, I certainly hope not, as that doesn't solve anything, but rather exacerbates existing tensions.

[Shelli]

yw, Legs.

all parties can just go on about their business of enjoying the :fflove: with whomever they want on ignore if need be at the click of a mouse?

A more difficult proposition inheres in the desire to start threads that will remain forever unsullied by the presence of the ignored member. That's a much tougher call than simply exercising the ignore option against individual members.

It's one thing where the ignored member is at least posting remotely on topic, and the ignorer may have to, at least, endure the sight of a quoted post. But that isn't what TJL was up to - he was pretty deliberately meaning to foment mayhem, as usual.
I agree. It certainly sucks when someone deliberately shits all over your thread(s). I've had it done to myself elsewhere and it tries one's patience to put it mildly.

I don't know what the solution for that is besides members ignoring flames so as not to burn the thread down but people are only human and are bound to crack sooner or later when someone is relentless enough.

[D. Scarlatti]

Thank you for not quoting my misspelled Latin phrase, else I woulda banned you from my Kraft Singles thread.

[Shelli]

:cheeseglomp: :giggle:

(erm.. I'm not even sure where that is :shiftier: )

[lisarea]

Is this where everyone picks sides? If so, count me out. I've had enough of that on forums. :nuhuh:

This is where I say, "OK. Got the gist. Unless there's some previously undisclosed meth and prostitution angle, this is where it starts to get boring, and everyone starts making really long, detailed posts in the inevitable forty or fifty postgame analysis threads, leaving important issues to wither from neglect. Can't we just start talking about underwear or robots or Kraft singles or something now?"

[D. Scarlatti]

I agree. It certainly sucks when someone deliberately shits all over your thread(s)

Me, I wouldn't mind so much. But like Legs says, different strokes for different folks, and that's the thing: TJL knew damn well what the reaction would be. Hell, he's known for ages what the reaction would be. Some people TJL won't tangle with so much. He picks his targets fairly carefully.

One thing about the intarwebs though, ain't no one ever going to get everyone else to ignore or quit feeding the shit disturbers. Look at that there guy Sock Puppet! He cain't help hisself.

eta: Or lisarea! The worst! She's proud to be a troll! From when they used rotary 'phones!

[Shelli]

"...Can't we just start talking about... Kraft singles or something now?"
I'd like to but I have no idea where that thread is. :sadcheer:

[Shelli]

One thing about the intarwebs though, ain't no one ever going to get everyone else to ignore or quit feeding the shit disturbers. Look at that there guy Sock Puppet! He cain't help hisself.

eta: Or lisarea! The worst! She's proud to be a troll! From when they used rotary 'phones!
:sockpuppet: :talkphon: :giggle:

[Clutch Munny]

Look, isn't it enough that we all agree that vm and Scarlatti are shitheads? Does common ground count for nothing?

[Shelli]

:chuckle:

[D. Scarlatti]

Don't anybody dare quote that Clutch Munny in here; I have him on ignore.

/me wonders how Legs can resist participating in all this frivolity

[ChuckF]

Hurry back, Legs! Legless forums don't run as smoothly :wink:

[yguy]

My PM's are open if anyone wants to say Hi - even Yguy :D

Well thanks. :) I don't have anything to say to you that can't be said publicly, though.

Believe it or not, Legs, I like both you and pepperspray, though obviously I don't care for much of what either of you have to say. That aside, as I guess you know by now, it's my opinion as of now that you're being a bit of a jerk.

You raise the possibility that pepperspray's conciliatory gestures have been disingenuous. Maybe they are. People often harbor motivations they are themselves unaware of, which compel them to act in contravention of their good intentions...but that's their problem. When you harbor hostility against anyone who is mean to you, even intentionally, you're creating and/or maintaining a problem for yourself.

Anyway, glad to hear you're apparently not gone forever. And if you wanna get in my face about anything I've said and don't want to say it on open, you are welcome to PM me. ;)

[freemonkey]

"...Can't we just start talking about... Kraft singles or something now?"
I'd like to but I have no idea where that thread is. :sadcheer:

Ahhhh, I remember it well. (http://www.freethought-forum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=6527&highlight=Kraft+Singles) What D. Scarlatti won't tell you is that that thread divided the forum into us vs. them sides. Kraft singles...... :bleh:

[lisarea]

eta: Or lisarea! The worst! She's proud to be a troll! From when they used rotary 'phones!

PICK ME. PICK ME! I promise I'll deliver the outrage!

Now that scandals involving two kinds of crank are all old-hat and all, I've been hard at work on my brand new, shocking, unprecedented THREE-CRANK scandal. Methamphetamines, wieners, AND ...

[godfry n. glad]

Excuse me...is it just me, or is yguy mellowing? :chin:

[quiet bear]

yes, yguy, while still a hump, has shown brief moments of actual human compassion...kind of. I like the guy. That's what I poke at him all the time.

speaking of humps, where's IRON MAN been?

Oh, wait...wrong thread.

[viscousmemories]

This whole thing is ugly from a variety of angles, but I think I understand where everyone is coming from. I hope the shoreline isn't too battered when it blows over.

[godfry n. glad]

yes, yguy, while still a hump, has shown brief moments of actual human compassion...kind of. I like the guy. That's what I poke at him all the time.

speaking of humps, where's IRON MAN been?

Oh, wait...wrong thread.

I think he's running around in his Carl Spackler sock.

[yguy]

I like the guy. That's what I poke at him all the time.

Well thanks for cluing me in. Had I known that, I wouldn't have been so obnoxious. :)

[yguy]

Excuse me...is it just me, or is yguy mellowing? :chin:

I'd say no. I just tend not to be as combative with women, generally speaking.

[Tanda]

Thanks for stopping in to let us know you're okay, Leggs.

[Shelli]

"...Can't we just start talking about... Kraft singles or something now?"
I'd like to but I have no idea where that thread is. :sadcheer:

Ahhhh, I remember it well. (http://www.freethought-forum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=6527&highlight=Kraft+Singles) What D. Scarlatti won't tell you is that that thread divided the forum into us vs. them sides. Kraft singles...... :bleh:
Thanks. That thread is a riot. :LMAO:

Kraft singles.... :eww:

[slimshady2357]

Congrats godfry, you won the horse racing. :vibes:


:scream:
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!

I was gonna catch him! I was I tells ya, I was! :cry:

It's ok, I'll survive.
:tremble:

I mean, you know, maybe Legs could come back real, real soon. :bigtears:

[TomJoe]

I like pepper. I like Legs. I think TJL is an attention ho who couldn't care less who gets hurt as long as he gets the attention he craves.


Exactly.

As far as TJL, wasn't his ass banned at one time?

[livius drusus]

No, he self-banned under his original id.

yguy, you're a teddy bear in disguise. :teddyhug:

[TomJoe]

No, he self-banned under his original id.


Oh. Bugger.

It's totally tasteless that, in a thread where Legs said her daughter is allowed to post (and there were only a handful according to Legs), the nutless wonder posts a beastiality video. No class at all.

[Shelli]

It's totally tasteless that, in a thread where Legs said her daughter is allowed to post (and there were only a handful according to Legs), the nutless wonder posts a beastiality video. No class at all.
Emphasis in bold mine.

I was thinking the same thing. It was beyond tasteless. It was tasteless that he posted that there at all as it belongs in the sexuality forum with a disclaimer no less. It was disgusting that he posted that in one of the only threads on the forum deemed okay by Legs for her daughter, Horsegirl, to read and post on.

TJL = :loser:

[Sock Puppet]

One thing about the intarwebs though, ain't no one ever going to get everyone else to ignore or quit feeding the shit disturbers. Look at that there guy Sock Puppet! He cain't help hisself.
I can quit anytime I want. I just don't wanna right now. You 12-steppers and all of your preaching, you think you're better than me, but you're-- you're--
/me staggers, falls over

I coulda stayed on my feet if I wanted to, too. Fuckers.

But on another note, it's true that I like to feed them. But the fun resides in carefully choosing what I feed them.

[D. Scarlatti]

Heh.

And huh, I wouldn't have known there was a little kid browsing a certain thread (aside from the general population of little kids browsing the internets in general), so I don't know if you can pin that one on TJL, unless he knew, in which case his cock-ness grows exponentially.

[xyza]

No, he self-banned under his original id.Has this gone full circle from over a year again then ??? :chin:

[Shelli]

No, he self-banned under his original id.Has this gone full circle from over a year again then ??? :chin:
huh.. it's lookin' that way, isn't it? :rolleye1:

[Crumb]

Legs said so in that thread, DS.

[Shelli]

He did, yes, but he could have honestly not read it, I'll admit.

I hope that that's what happened and that he didn't do it on purpose.

[D. Scarlatti]

Well I'm just saying, maybe TJL wasn't aware of that. It's a long thread. Also, the thing about those youtube links is you don't know what's at 'em if just the URL is pasted in, which is just an alphanumeric thing. So yeah, even rudimentary netiquette would seem to require some sort of Warning! Man fucking donkey! disclaimer. But I guess that would be trampling all over TJL's "freedom" or something.

[Sweetie]

It's all so ridiculous really.

It has certainly been made clear by TJL that he felt offended by Legs' slight of ignoring him for no real reason whatsoever. It's like she was saying to him that he wasn't worth knowing, and that the little she does know about him, which is essentially nothing, means that he's worthless to know or hear from, or he has all potentially worthless contributions as a person.

He starts up threads then, instead of controversial issues, about his passions, things that he's good at, photography which once upon a time him and Legs discussed, since he and Legs live so close to each other even so as to have witnessed and been at the same sights together. To me that's him saying, ok, lets not talk about opinions, here's something that I do, and I hope I do well. This is a part of me as a person, is it worthwhile too, or is it worthless because it's mine because I offended Legs once upon a time in no apparent way, and for no real reason she would rather I not exist.

Hell, I've been told that by TomJoe, first that I should eat shit and die, and then he clarified, no, I actually don't wish you dead, I just could care less if you existed or not, and would rather your existence not interfere with my own.

So I mean, in some ways his complaints about he ignore feature are justifiable and it seems very clear to me that he is acting out of a sort of hurt.

So, he wants to participate in the more lighter aspects of this place, and threads. Problem is, a few of them Legs has started, and Legs puts her name on it, so he thinks, this person would rather I didn't exist, yet......I still want to participate in the very few active threads that are happening here, yet......these ones belong to Legs so I'm not welcome.

A lot of us would just say fuck it to whomever starts a thread, and to whom a thread revolves around, this is a very small place with small cliques, and a small circle so the fact is, if you don't fit in with them, yet find other worthwhile people here, you are going to have to be amongst the "cool kids," to do it and I said it once, and I'll say it again to TJL, who wants to know someone like that and who cares if her daughter participates in one thread?

Personally, I'm not real comfortable with her daughter being here at all and I think the desired age for participation at these forums is at least thirteen, because it's adult content, some of it explicit adult content which her own mother is the author of. Even if Legs isn't monitering her daughter on this forum, because she knows of this specific place and it's ok'd by her mother, she might visit on her own time, her mother brought her here, her mother and father participate here.

Hell, if her mother can't take the heat, why the fuck would she bring her daughter here to expose her to it? It's just a pile o' stupid, and Shelli using it as an accusation.....TJL expressed his hurt in a thread that her daughter is participating in is poor taste......give me a break Shelli. He hardly said nothing, and he was entitled to it. The amount one would accuse him of over hardly no words at all, and no insulting or harsh words at all but his own hurt ones, is fucking insanity.

Y'all are nuts man.

[Dingfod]

Y'all are nuts man.You are.

[Sweetie]

You are.

So sayeth the ass-kissing diagnosed depressive.

[D. Scarlatti]

One person is not a clique, and TJL is not shunned by the other 1,236 members.

[Shelli]

:fart:

[Sweetie]

I think TJL had a valid point, and he also is not guilty of half the things you guys would accuse him of.

Hell, lets dig up an old thread started by Legs and Widget in rejoicing that someone they don't like was leaving. It was loud, offensive, and beyond immature, this thread of theirs. I wish someone would have the guts to have done one in Legs' honour so that she can suffer the same shit she tries to pull with other people, a little cats in the cradle so to speak. We call it justice.

Widget just started a thread a few months ago to let everybody know exaclty who he was ignoring, and how cool he was, and how much these people on his ignore list suck. It was a whole popularity thing, and it was ridiculous as hell. It's too bad some of us aren't as ridiculous as all that, otherwise we could have been just, but justice in their case is extreme immaturity, and some of us are adults.

[Dingfod]

So sayeth the ass-kissing diagnosed depressive.What's that got to with you being nuts?

[D. Scarlatti]

No point digging up old threads, the cool kids are already well aware of the dynamics.

[freemonkey]

One person is not a clique, and TJL is not shunned by the other 1,236 members.
Only some of them.

TJL expressed his hurt in a thread that her daughter is participating in is poor taste......give me a break Shelli. He hardly said nothing, and he was entitled to it. The amount one would accuse him of over hardly no words at all, and no insulting or harsh words at all but his own hurt ones, is fucking insanity.
Um.... the poor taste accusation, I believe, referred to TJL's linking of a sexually explicit video in the thread in question.

egs' slight of ignoring him for no real reason whatsoever. It's like she was saying to him that he wasn't worth knowing, and that the little she does know about him, which is essentially nothing, means that he's worthless to know or hear from, or he has all potentially worthless contributions as a person.
You do assume a lot, don't you?

[Sweetie]

So sayeth the ass-kissing diagnosed depressive.What's that got to with you being nuts?

Insane people are the best judges of what is or is not, insane. Their own insanity is sanity, see the logic? No, no warren, I guess you can't, can you? Pity.

You know what I think? I think you should paint yourself green.

[Dingfod]

In a comparison of psychoses, I think you win, hands down. I've only got the depression thing going for me.

[Sweetie]

[quote]Um.... the poor taste accusation, I believe, referred to TJL's linking of a sexually explicit video in the thread in question.

Well I missed the video, but it is certainly not uncalled for in a place for adults to mingle, freethoughts, and where adults can be explicit.

No seriously, do we have to watch what we say now because Legs' daughter is around? Should her Mommy stop posting pictures of naked women bent over in all sorts of seductive and suggestive pictures? I just don't agree, and never have, that Horse Girl should be here, I think that's a parents bad decision myself, so what TLJ posted is well within his rights, and while the video might have been poor taste, it's less poor taste if her daughter wasn't in the thread, and then it very well could have been considered funny by some men, for instance, who share such humour, who knows.

[Julie]

You want to know what I think Sweetie?

It's Legs prerogative on who she ignores, just like its mine to now add you to my Ignore list.

/me is not part of any clique on here, I just think you are a world class fucknut!

[Sweetie]

In a comparison of psychoses, I think you win, hands down. I've only got the depression thing going for me.

Warren, you're so funny. You accuse me of saying something embarassing about sex.....I mean, give me a break. You want something embarassing, go put "livius drusus - porn" in the Google search engine, now that's fucking embarassing.

You're just absurd. Get over it, babe. When you become astute, then I'll care what you have to say. Since that's not likely to happen in the near future, just walk away honey.

[D. Scarlatti]

One person is not a clique, and TJL is not shunned by the other 1,236 members.
Only some of them.

True, I would imagine, but others occasionally come to his defense. And you don't see people barging into his photo threads with off-topic mockery and gratuitous disruption. I just think this whole "clique" bullshit is just that - bullshit.

Of course if you find a group of people with common interests and in frequent agreement, and you're some sort of off-the-wall nutcase, then obviously the former group is going to seem like a clique during the ensuing interactions.

It's not necessarily the group that makes itself a "clique," it's the off-the-wall nutcase.

[freemonkey]

[quote]Um.... the poor taste accusation, I believe, referred to TJL's linking of a sexually explicit video in the thread in question.

Well I missed the video, but it is certainly not uncalled for in a place for adults to mingle, freethoughts, and where adults can be explicit.
Usually, that kind of thing goes into the sexuality forum, or gets a NWS warning. I did not see the video, either, but from what I've gathered, it was not just that it was explicit, it involved a certain animal.

[Sorrel]

*sigh* All this hostility.

[wei yau]

Let's see now. In a short time, Sweetie has managed to

- portray Legs as a bad mom
- portray Legs and Widget as bad forum members
- portray TJL as an innocent victim
- disparage Dingfod
- disparage livius

Not bad for a day's work and there's still time left!

The scary thing is that I don't necessarily disagree with Sweetie on some of her opinions on this increasingly tiresome situation, but damn she makes it hard to agree with when she starts slinging shit at anyone near (or not so near) to the topic.

[Sweetie]

You want to know what I think Sweetie?

It's Legs prerogative on who she ignores, just like its mine to now add you to my Ignore list.

* Julie is not part of any clique on here, I just think you are a world class fucknut!

Wow, your originality knows no bounds.

[Dingfod]

I don't give a fucking rat's ass about looking for things embarassing. Apparently you thrive on it, Sweetie. That's a sign of something seriously askew in your thought processes. The fact that you dredge up shit from years ago and hold grudges just as long, is another sign. The fact that people put others on Ignore in FF isn't a sign of anything except wanting to enhance their FF experience. *plonk* bitch.

[D. Scarlatti]

*sigh* All this hostility.

I like to think of it as a "policy discussion." :P

[wei yau]

True, I would imagine, but others occasionally come to his defense.

More than just coming to TJL's defense, I recall several (not a few) posters trying to help get past his problems with being ignored. These posters were sincere and genuine in their efforts, though it seems to have done little good.

[Dingfod]

True, I would imagine, but others occasionally come to his defense.

More than just coming to TJL's defense, I recall several (not a few) posters trying to help get past his problems with being ignored. These posters were sincere and genuine in their efforts, though it seems to have done little good.I've really tried to engage TJL and Sweetie on some sort of constructive level, but it has been to no avail.

[Sweetie]

Let's see now. In a short time, Sweetie has managed to

- portray Legs as a bad mom
- portray Legs and Widget as bad forum members
- portray TJL as an innocent victim
- disparage Dingfod
- disparage livius

Not bad for a day's work and there's still time left!

The scary thing is that I don't necessarily disagree with Sweetie on some of her opinions on this increasingly tiresome situation, but damn she makes it hard to agree with when she starts slinging shit at anyone near (or not so near) to the topic.

Haha. Well, once again, lets start from the beginning. I remember the thread TJL started a few months ago about Legs ignoring him and how he felt about it, do you remember it? I participated in it. I also remember his pics he posted when he was first here, they should still be in the Gallery, and him and Legs discussing some of them in there so if you want to understand where TJL is coming from, perhaps we should refer back to that thread, no?

Secondly, I do think it's absurd to have a young girl here, don't you? Do you bring your daughter here? Why not? Adult content, right? And who is the one guilty of posting regular adult content materiel publicly and loudly and largely? That is Legs. You can disagree with me that this is not a good thing for a parent to do, but it is Legs, and it's undeniable. I do not consider it a responsible thing to be bringing one's young daughter here, but that's my perogative, you are welcome to disagree.

Then Warren disparaged me, over what I think are perfectly valid points. He also disparaged me in one of my threads less than a month ago, so I brought that up, I just revamped it, so instead of just disparaging me, he can disparage some of his friends with the same insult. He basically said I should wear a mask with what looked like a noose around it because I had said something explicit about my likes or disliked in the anal sex thread. Well, guess what, it's not an embarassing thing to say, you want to tnow what I think is embarassing........whoop, there it is.

And yes, once again, I am reminded of how much I dislike livius drusus. It's a whole long deal revolving around D. Scarlatti and Adora, and I'm sure I'm entirely unjustified in my position, because it's mine, but either way......whoop, there it is.

[wei yau]

I understand, hing-dai.

I believe that you do what you can and if that fails, then you move on. I've never been one to try and change someone's mind or their behavior, certainly not on an Internet forum. I'll offer my opinion and advice, solicited or not. Sometimes I come off as preachy and I take pains to avoid it, but I suppose it's my nature.

[Plant Woman]

Of course if you find a group of people with common interests and in frequent agreement, and you're some sort of off-the-wall nutcase, then obviously the former group is going to seem like a clique during the ensuing interactions.

Especially when the nutcase comes in and from the first few posts his guns blazing--criticizing the forum, its admins and its members. And over the course of time he has his outbreaks, has no sense of other people's boundaries, then whines over and over again about how people are ignoring him. I think he reaped what he sowed (to borrow a biblical phrase.)

[Sweetie]

I've really tried to engage TJL and Sweetie on some sort of constructive level, but it has been to no avail.

Ah yes, the provider of sanity and reason to the outcasts amongst you, that is Dingfod!

We have engaged on constructive levels......until you go and screw it up again.

[D. Scarlatti]

criticizing the forum, its admins and its members.

Well, I don't get that either. If people hate this place so much, hate the people who run it, and hate the people that post regularly, whom they continually disparage as a "clique" and a "girlie gang," why are they often among the most active participants? Makes no sense to me.

[Plant Woman]

:blahblah:

:lalala:

[Plant Woman]

Well, I don't get that either. If people hate this place so much, hate the people who run it, and hate the people that post regularly, whom they continually disparage as a "clique" and a "girlie gang," why are they often among the most active participants? Makes no sense to me.

Even though it doesn't make sense, some people thrive on it. :therapy:

I think I've had enough negativity for the day, and now that the queen of negativity is taking over the thread, there is little hope for anything but.

[wei yau]

I remember the thread TJL started a few months ago about Legs ignoring him and how he felt about it, do you remember it? I participated in it.

I don't know if we're remembering the same thread, but I recall at least one (if not more) post from TJL about his feelings about being ignored. My recollection shows that some posters took offense to his characterization that any forum with ignore features is a hindrance to free speech, some posters told him to get over it (not always politely, yes) and some posters sincerely engaged him and offered kindly advice. And also some posters agreed with him all around, though I can't remember any specifics.

I also remember his pics he posted when he was first here, they should still be in the Gallery, and him and Legs discussing some of them in there so if you want to understand where TJL is coming from, perhaps we should refer back to that thread, no?

Don't see the reason for it, as I'm sure your recollection is correct. However, I don't quite get your point.

Secondly, I do think it's absurd to have a young girl here, don't you? Do you bring your daughter here? Why not? Adult content, right? And who is the one guilty of posting regular adult content materiel publicly and loudly and largely? That is Legs. You can disagree with me that this is not a good thing for a parent to do, but it is Legs, and it's undeniable. I do not consider it a responsible thing to be bringing one's young daughter here, but that's my perogative, you are welcome to disagree.

I've got no dog in this fight. My daughter is far too young to understand any of the stuff here, although she does like watching the animated smileys.

I certainly agree that there are somethings in here that wouldn't be appropriate for a child, but that's up to the individual parent.

As for Legs' specific actions, I really don't have an opinion.

Then Warren disparaged me, over what I think are perfectly valid points.

In this thread, my hing-dai simply retorted "You are!" in response to your claim that we were all nuts. I've heard worse and was surprised at your reaction.

He also disparaged me in one of my threads less than a month ago, so I brought that up, I just revamped it, so instead of just disparaging me, he can disparage some of his friends with the same insult. He basically said I should wear a mask with what looked like a noose around it because I had said something explicit about my likes or disliked in the anal sex thread. Well, guess what, it's not an embarassing thing to say, you want to tnow what I think is embarassing........whoop, there it is.

I have to admit that I don't recall every post. You certainly have reason to recollect this exchange in particular, as it dealt directly with you. If there is a past history of animity between you and Dingfod, then I can see you carry that baggage with you wherever you and he post.

Personally, I'm more of the bygones type of thinking.

And yes, once again, I am reminded of how much I dislike livius drusus. It's a whole long deal revolving around D. Scarlatti and Adora, and I'm sure I'm entirely unjustified in my position, because it's mine, but either way......whoop, there it is.

Again, you're certainly entitled to your opinions of all of these people and you're certainly entitled to bring them up whenever you want (whether it is germane or not to the topic). I wouldn't do that because I don't want my FF experience to be so negative, but if it works for you.

I certainly don't disagree with you simply because you're you, but I am sorry that you believe this to be true.

[D. Scarlatti]

lol@whole long deal revolving around the ignore function. There's some world class irony for ya.

[yguy]

It has certainly been made clear by TJL that he felt offended by Legs' slight of ignoring him for no real reason whatsoever. It's like she was saying to him that he wasn't worth knowing, and that the little she does know about him, which is essentially nothing, means that he's worthless to know or hear from, or he has all potentially worthless contributions as a person.

So what's wrong with her making that decision with respect to her own life?

So I mean, in some ways his complaints about he ignore feature are justifiable

Like Hell they are. No one has the right to insinuate himself into the life of another in any degree against that person's will.

and it seems very clear to me that he is acting out of a sort of hurt.

Why is that noteworthy? Couldn't Legs be said to have been "acting out of a sort of hurt"?

[yguy]

yguy, you're a teddy bear in disguise. :teddyhug:

I guess that's supposed to be a compliment...

:tongue:

[ms_ann_thrope]

He basically said I should wear a mask with what looked like a noose around it because I had said something explicit about my likes or disliked in the anal sex thread. Well, guess what, it's not an embarassing thing to say, you want to tnow what I think is embarassing........whoop, there it is.Heh. If you only knew the actual circumstances leading to Dingfod's post in your until-then totally ignored costume thread... :giggle:

The really funny thing is that you still don't seem to comprehend why what you wrote was worthy of a suggestion that you put a bag over your face. It wasn't because what you wrote was explicit, Sweetie. It was because it was so pathetically narcissistic.

Being such a narcissist, however, you cannot see the difference.

[Sweetie]

Just for the record, it's this whole hypocrasy thing I'm really against.

We have everybody running around trying to kiss Legs' ass and assuage her hurt, always defending those in the clique and in this case, coming down on TJL way too hard, and with way too many ad hominems and criticisms that are way, way off base.

Has it ever been acknowledged that Legs has caused hurt and offense to other people? When will that be a consideration or is she just this nice lady, therefore one must dump on the other guy? I think that Legs has caused her own fair share of hurt either on her own, or in support of her husband, but that's just me.

Secondly, the hypocrasy of the accusation against TJL of posting offensive and explicit material to Legs' young daughter. First of all, there is offensive and explicit material all over this forum, just TJL is guilty of something because he posted it around HorseGirl? Well, HorseGirl is here, then we're all guilty of that. I think the guilt lies with the parent who brings the child here, and not only that, allows her to have her own account which means she can stop in a read whenever she wants.

And not only that, the accusation when Legs herself posts the largest amount of regular explicit material of all. Well, that's not as bad because it's not offensive in the same way TJL's was, right, it's just a question of degrees? Give me a fucking break already, the absurdity and irony of it all is just, mindnumbing.

Oh but really, it's all TJL, not Shelli for being an ignorant hypocrite, not this, not that. Hell, if we're going to let negativity fly at TJL, why don't we spread it around a bit and be a little bit more fair in the process?

Oddly enough, that's what I said in Legs' and Widgets' "Yeah, we got rid of Carlos," thread, this idea that we need to be a little more fair in our judgements, which means Legs and Widget are going to have to suffer some negativity because of their own behavior and I'm just speaking up in defense of TJL, because no one else will, even though the case seems to be crystal clear, and not what others make it out to be.

In that sense I mean, I'm speaking up, because enough people tell me they don't agree with y'all about many things, they just say so privately and don't get mixed up in these things. Well, I speak up, and some of you should speak up for me sometimes, that's what I think.

[D. Scarlatti]

Your search - livius drusus-porn - did not match any documents.

Goddamnit.

[TomJoe]

He did, yes, but he could have honestly not read it, I'll admit.

Sure, it's a possibility ... but I haven't even posted in that thread, and I knew about it. What's his excuse? He's just a moron?

[TomJoe]

It's ...

:blahblah:

:badpenny:

[ChuckF]

Just for the record, it's this whole hypocrasy thing I'm really against.
...
Secondly, the hypocrasy of the accusation against TJL of posting offensive and explicit material to Legs' young daughter.
I thought only doctors could be hypocrates!

[yguy]

Has it ever been acknowledged that Legs has caused hurt and offense to other people?

I can well imagine that she has. I think it's safe to say that you have as well. ;)

[Sweetie]

Heh. If you only knew the actual circumstances leading to Dingfod's post in your until-then totally ignored costume thread... :giggle:

The really funny thing is that you still don't seem to comprehend why what you wrote was worthy of a suggestion that you put a bag over your face. It wasn't because what you wrote was explicit, Sweetie. It was because it was so pathetically narcissistic.

Being such a narcissist, however, you cannot see the difference.

You're right, I haven't been privy to the information that an example of narcissism is saying that 69 is hawt enough for me, but you know, perhaps I'm just unaware of what narcissism really is, do enlighten me, oh in the right one.

[Sweetie]

I can well imagine that she has. I think it's safe to say that you have as well. ;)

Me? Never!

But then perhaps it's safe to say that if you asked me what has hurt me as well, I might actually have a satisfactory answer, and whether or not I'm willing to risk hurting those who have not in fact, hurt me......but that's just me.

[Watser?]

I can well imagine that she has. I think it's safe to say that you have as well. ;)

Me? Never!

But then perhaps it's safe to say that if you asked me what has hurt me as well, I might actually have a satisfactory answer, and whether or not I'm willing to risk hurting those who have not in fact, hurt me......but that's just me.

No! You? Never!

I have met some mean bitches in real life and on the internets, but I am happy to say I have never met anyone like you. And combined with that username it is either sheer brilliance or an amazing talent for not knowing yourself. (But is the latter of course...)

yguy, stop being reasonable, you are scaring me :afraid2:

[Shelli]

I have met some mean bitches in real life and on the internets, but I am happy to say I have never met anyone like you. And combined with that username it is either sheer brilliance or an amazing talent for not knowing yourself. (But is the latter of course...)
Like a sweetly named dog gone rabid. :dogbite:

yguy, stop being reasonable, you are scaring me :afraid2:
No shit. :tremble:

[ms_ann_thrope]

You're right, I haven't been privy to the information that an example of narcissism is saying that 69 is hawt enough for me, but you know, perhaps I'm just unaware of what narcissism really is, do enlighten me, oh in the right one.Saying that "69 is hawt enough for me" wouldn't be narcissistic. But that's not what you said. You wrote:

Was sitting on my husband's face the other night, took a break from giving him head in the 69 position, sat up and caught us in the mirror. It was very hawt. I was not bent over getting it up the ass, it was still hot, sexy as hell.
Your unsolicited announcement to the forum that you find looking at yourself in a mirror in this context "hawt" and "sexy as hell" is a pretty clear example of your tiresome self-admiration, self-regard, and vanity.

Diagnostic criteria for 301.81 Narcissistic Personality Disorder

A pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration, and lack of empathy, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by five (or more) of the following:

(1) has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements)

(2) is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love

(3) believes that he or she is "special" and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions)

(4) requires excessive admiration

(5) has a sense of entitlement, i.e., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations

(6) is interpersonally exploitative, i.e., takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends

(7) lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others

(8) is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of him or her

(9) shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes
Personally, I think there is strong evidence of 7 of these in your posting history here.

[maddog]

I don't have a choice about my feelings. They come to me whether I want them to or not. I DO, however, have a choice about what I do in response to my feelings.

I have more than sufficient empathy with others to understand when they describe hurt feelings. But feeling hurt does not justify any and all responses. I still, for the most part, have control over what I say and do. (One exception, for me, is being in the presence of something I'm phobic about, like bugs. My physical reaction is a lot quicker than my brain, and I cannot prevent my recoiling; at least I have not been successful at that so far.)

Viktor Frankl survived the Nazi concentration camps, where they did a lot to people that was hurtful. Yet he managed to find a way not to be simply reactive to the horrible things that were done to him and to his fellow prisoners. Between the stimulus and response is a moment of freedom, the freedom to choose how to react. He even found love and tenderness in that environment, and chose to dedicate the rest of his life to helping others find and choose love, no matter what the external circumstances are.

All human beings sometimes say or do things which hurt others. All human beings have the common experience of being hurt by something that someone else has said or done. What I strive for out of this is to find common understanding, empathy, compassion and caring, rather than lashing out, retaliation and further hurtful behaviors.

I can certainly understand feeling hurt. But my challenge when I feel hurt is, what do I do or say in response? Hurting someone back is inconsistent with my principles. There is nothing compelled or necessary in responding in kind.

#1013

[Sweetie]

Saying that "69 is hawt enough for me" wouldn't be narcissistic. But that's not what you said. You wrote:
Was sitting on my husband's face the other night, took a break from giving him head in the 69 position, sat up and caught us in the mirror. It was very hawt. I was not bent over getting it up the ass, it was still hot, sexy as hell.Your unsolicited announcement to the forum that you find looking at yourself in a mirror in this context "hawt" and "sexy as hell" is a pretty clear example of your tiresome self-admiration, self-regard, and vanity.

Ummm, nooo, see if you asked, a lot of people consider their own sex acts witnessed in a mirror a sexy thing in itself. It need not necessarily have anything to do with the attractiveness of either of those reflected in the mirror, or the sexiness of either of those in the mirror.

So it was against what I thought, was a charge of prudishness, and a charge of being prudish to the point of having sex through a sheet. Assuming that, which I've already clarified once before, since prudishness is what I'm trying to disprove, then the fact that I do not like sex through a sheet, whereas the people cannot see each other, I don't even mind watching me and my husband together in a mirror, which some people think a sexy thing in itself, irregardless of any personal attractiveness at all, then I'm not very prudish, am I?

You know.......if anybody had bothered to ask or risk a varied interpretation or paid attention to the perceived charge and therefore the rebuttal but I can't count on you to pick up on little details and reasonings which are so subtle yet important to put things in perspective and context. I realize you are much more haughtier and happier with your own perceptions and interpretations so as to, you think, have ammunition against me, but things don't always work out that way, I'm sorry.

So next time, please ask, that's my request, but you may disregard it as many of you in this thread, disregard facts and cases as they are, in general in order to feel justified in coming down on others.

[yguy]

I can well imagine that she has. I think it's safe to say that you have as well. ;)

Me? Never!

But then perhaps it's safe to say that if you asked me what has hurt me as well, I might actually have a satisfactory answer,

I doubt it. If you were humiliated by someone and then returned the favor as payback, you overcame evil with evil. And you know that ain't Christian.

[Plant Woman]

Dang, I was going to not post here again. I don't go into the sexuality forums as I am not that enlightened like you all are (some what of a prude when it comes to talking about sex). I have to say after reading what queen negativity wrote about her sex act with her husband here on this thread, I can't help but think what a hypocrite she is. After reading her climb all over LS for being a stripper and jibes about porn in the spanking thread. How much more pornographic in detail can you get after reading her night with hubby. I want to throw up after reading it, mostly because she is a snake. Creepy, just makes my skin crawl.

Please don't ask her for anymore details. I think she was detailed enough. There's your porn star!

[Shelli]

There's your porn star!
:goldstar: :sweaty: :goldstar:

[maddog]

Dagnabbit, ms ann! there are REASONS why I seldom visit any thread in the sexuality forums. Couldn't you at least have put spoiler tags around that quote? This is "The Atrium" after all!

#1014

[ms_ann_thrope]

Wow, #3, #5, and #9 right there in that rebuttal post!

I genuinely hope that someday soon you will seek help for your problems. You're truly insufferable. *plonk*

[yguy]

There is nothing compelled or necessary in responding in kind.


If it's not compelled, why do people do it?

[ms_ann_thrope]

Doooh, sorry maddog.

Bet you're glad that a group of us decided not to go ahead with our plan of using juicy Sweetie quotes as our sigs!

[maddog]

There is nothing compelled or necessary in responding in kind.

If it's not compelled, why do people do it?
I think people often don't realize how much choice and power they have. That's why I think Viktor Frankl is such an interesting example. Most people would, I think, feel entitled to simply react in kind to the most horrific of bad treatment at the hands of the SS. The brilliance of Frankl is that he realized there is no such entitlement, no such necessity, and no such compulsion. And that is how he managed to find love, fulfillment, kindness, compassion, self-awareness, and meaning in life, even under the direst of stimuli. And then he dedicated the rest of his life to teaching people what he had discovered.

#1016

[Shelli]

Wow. Swety is earning herself quite a few :plonk: in this thread today.

[maddog]

Doooh, sorry maddog.

Bet you're glad that a group of us decided not to go ahead with our plan of using juicy Sweetie quotes as our sigs!
It's not too late to fix your post by putting the tags in! (hint!) and yes, but fortunately I have the ability to ignore sigs.

#1017

[ms_ann_thrope]

It's not too late to fix your post by putting the tags in! (hint!):fixed:

I hope you make a full recovery.
:doctor2:

[yguy]

There is nothing compelled or necessary in responding in kind.

If it's not compelled, why do people do it?
I think people often don't realize how much choice and power they have.

Why don't they?

The brilliance of Frankl is that he realized there is no such entitlement, no such necessity, and no such compulsion.

I agree, but people often confuse that kind of brilliance with intellectual capacity, which is irrelevant to what you're talking about.

[erimir]

Then Warren disparaged me, over what I think are perfectly valid points. He also disparaged me in one of my threads less than a month ago, so I brought that up,Yes, you brought it up, even though it was completely irrelevant, and added in an insult to another member who has had no part in the argument in this thread. A perfectly innocent thing to do, of course. Or maybe not, since I can't see any reason for adding in random insults to other people.

And, btw, depression is not the same thing as insanity. Not that I would expect someone "interested in psychology" to understand that.

And no, I'm not saying that what dingfod said was good. But for some reason, if I address your bullshit, I'm expected to what, refute a post that says "You are [nuts]"?
Bet you're glad that a group of us decided not to go ahead with our plan of using juicy Sweetie quotes as our sigs!I'm not :sadcheer:

[Dingfod]

And no, I'm not saying that what dingfod said was good. But for some reason, if I address your bullshit, I'm expected to what, refute a post that says "You are [nuts]"?Which is basically what started the whole thing, Sweetie said "Y'all are nuts." I'm one of "Y'all". But, the best response to my one-liner would've been to ignore it. Or, as I have invited Sweetie to do on several occasions, to put me on Ignore. After all, I have never said anything of interest to her, at least according to her standards of contributions to threads she considers important, like this one, begging a friend to reconsider leaving over comments from assinine shitheads like TJL [and Sweetie] and occasional asshats like pepperspray. If I'm being an asshole it's invariably in reaction to one. I invite anyone that doesn't like me to put me on Ignore, it will not bother me one whit.

[BDS]

I don't have a choice about my feelings. They come to me whether I want them to or not. I DO, however, have a choice about what I do in response to my feelings.......



All human beings sometimes say or do things which hurt others. All human beings have the common experience of being hurt by something that someone else has said or done. What I strive for out of this is to find common understanding, empathy, compassion and caring, rather than lashing out, retaliation and further hurtful behaviors.

I can certainly understand feeling hurt. But my challenge when I feel hurt is, what do I do or say in response? Hurting someone back is inconsistent with my principles. There is nothing compelled or necessary in responding in kind.

#1013

Nonetheless, there is a long tradition (especially for us men) of thinking it honorable to accept a challenge. Even a lousy shot is honorable when he steps onto the dueling pitch.

It is, of course, also true that we moderns believe that REFUSING to accept a silly challenge is not NECESSARILY dishonorable. Also, I'm not sure that we have no choice about our feelings. Certainly the Christian point of view is that we CAN change the way we feel, with God's help.

By the way, in anticipation of my trip to India next week, I bought some novels. I gathered about 6 famous novels about India (all but one by Indians) and bought the two with the best opening lines. One of the two is “Shantaram”, by Gregory David Roberts, an Australian who fled from the iron hand of the law in his native land, and lived in the underworld of Mumbai for a decade and more. Here’s the opening that led me to buy it, and that Frankl and Maddog might enjoy:

It took me a long time and most of the world to learn what I know about love and fate and the choices we make, but the heart of it came to me in an instant, while I was chained to a wall and being tortured. I realized, somehow, through the screaming in my mind, that even in that shackled, bloody helplessness I was still free: free to hate the men who were torturing me, or to forgive them. It doesn’t sound like much, I know. But in the flinch and bite of the chain, when it’s all you’ve got, that freedom is a universe of possibility. And the choice you make, between hating and forgiving, can become the story of your life.

Will the novel live up to its outstanding opening? I'll report later.

[maddog]

BDS,
Is one of the others "A Passage to India" by chance? I just finished listening to Forster's "A room with a view" a week or so ago, and so admired and loved the richness of the language and imagery.

Yes, I think you're quite right. I DO appreciate that opening, and look forward to your report of your trip and your readings!

It is, of course, also true that we moderns believe that REFUSING to accept a silly challenge is not NECESSARILY dishonorable. Also, I'm not sure that we have no choice about our feelings. Certainly the Christian point of view is that we CAN change the way we feel, with God's help.I think that's the "psychological" point of view, too. I'm making a distinction between feelings which come unbidden, and over which we have no direct control, and our abilities to indirectly influence our feelings through our choices. Even non-Christians can change the way they feel about something, with help. For example, feelings fade over time, unless they are restimulated. E.g. if you are depressed over the breakup of a relationship, you might feel sad. Your choices about your behavior can have an indirect influence over those feelings. If you sit slumped over in a darkened room and play "our song" over and over, it would not be surprising to find yourself slipping into depression, and restimulating the feelings of sadness. Otoh, if you go out for a long walk, visit with friends, take on an intellectual challenge, do a good turn for someone else, and so on, you can indirectly diminish or change the sad feelings. How you respond to the feeling is a matter of choice. the initial appearance of the feeling doesn't appear to be a matter of choice.

BTW, I have stolen all this from David K. Reynolds, whom I have mentioned before. ;)



#1018

[xyza]

Be ready for a shock ... I'm shocked
You're right, I haven't been privy to the information that an example of narcissism is saying that 69 is hawt enough for me, but you know, perhaps I'm just unaware of what narcissism really is, do enlighten me, oh in the right one.Saying that "69 is hawt enough for me" wouldn't be narcissistic. But that's not what you said. You wrote:

Was sitting on my husband's face the other night, took a break from giving him head in the 69 position, sat up and caught us in the mirror. It was very hawt. I was not bent over getting it up the ass, it was still hot, sexy as hell.
Your unsolicited announcement to the forum that you find looking at yourself in a mirror in this context "hawt" and "sexy as hell" is a pretty clear example of your tiresome self-admiration, self-regard, and vanity.

Diagnostic criteria for 301.81 Narcissistic Personality Disorder

A pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration, and lack of empathy, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by five (or more) of the following:

(1) has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements)

(2) is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love

(3) believes that he or she is "special" and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions)

(4) requires excessive admiration

(5) has a sense of entitlement, i.e., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations

(6) is interpersonally exploitative, i.e., takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends

(7) lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others

(8) is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of him or her

(9) shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes
Personally, I think there is strong evidence of 7 of these in your posting history here.Whilst I do not disagree with the thought that Sweetie could (and may have already) be diagnosed with a PD, there are many and in truth many of us have different elements of each stronger than the next person.

So Sweetie appears this way online, doesn't mean she is in RL, it's what the internet does to/for us, we are allowed to relax a little, let those parts of us we bottle up because society says it's not 'socially acceptable behaviour', sorry that is all a PD is.

To say that Sweeties unsolicited announcement to the forum that you find looking at yourself in a mirror in this context "hawt" and "sexy as hell" is a pretty clear example of your tiresome self-admiration, self-regard, and vanity. is totally rediculous, it shows that she is comfortable in her sexuality and sensual with it ... Maybe if you see it as something preverse you have some sort a sexual problem.


Sorry, not standing up for sweetie, never have never will, just hate the big sex tabboo and mental health issue. Freud was the biggest sexual deviant to ever be published.

[ms_ann_thrope]

xyza,

Please go read the entire "my sweet virgin ass" thread to understand the context of Sweetie's "hawt" post, then kindly reconsider your comments above. I think you'll see who the person is with the sex and mental health issues.

Hint: it sure as hell ain't me!

[Dingfod]

Online psychological diagnosis is probably best left to amateurs because no ethical professional would touch it with a 10 foot couch.

[Shelli]

:chuckle:

[ms_ann_thrope]

Online psychological diagnosis is probably best left to amateurs because no ethical professional would touch it with a 10 foot couch.Shut up, crazy!

[Plant Woman]

put me on Ignore.
*plonk*
I invite anyone that doesn't like me to put me on Ignore, it will not bother me one whit.
Oh wait! Come back here! I likes you.
Certainly the Christian point of view is that we CAN change the way we feel, with God's help.
I think we can change when we come to terms with those things, a healing if you will and it doesn't come from God, but within ourselves; sometimes with help (such as therapy), or perceived help (thinking they need help outside themselves such as God).

[Plant Woman]

I know a few who are doing research on the interactions on the web. However they use a global 10 foot pole to reel them in. :giggle:

[BDS]

BDS,
Is one of the others "A Passage to India" by chance? I just finished listening to Forster's "A room with a view" a week or so ago, and so admired and loved the richness of the language and imagery.

[/color]

I love “A Passage to India”, but I’ve already read it. (I love “A Room with a View, too.)

The other novel I bought is “The God of Small Things” by Arundhati Roy. I was attracted to the lovely visage of the author, the Booker Prize the novel won, and the opening lines. Here’s how Roy gets it done:


May in Avenenem is a hot, brooding month. The days are long and humid. The river shrinks, and black crows gorge on bright mangoes in still, dustgreen trees. Red bananas ripen. Jackfruits burst. Dissolute bluebottles hum vacuously in the fruity air. Then they stun themselves against clear windowpanes and die, fatly baffled in the sun.

The nights are clear, but suffused with sloth and sullen expectations.


As far as our control over our feelings, the Christian view of agape is that of love as an act of will. That’s one thing I was thinking of. I’m not sure whether such love is best described as a “feeling”, or as something else. That would be another discussion, and a long, involved one.

[The Lone Ranger]

It's my impression that people often use the term "honor" when they really mean "pride" or "ego".


Let us suppose that someone calls me a liar. Perhaps I might respond with, "You, sirrah, have insulted mine honor! The only way to restore honor is for us to fight -- prepare yourself!"

My first response is true -- he has insulted my honor, or more precisely, he has suggested that I'm a dishonorable person. My second statement is nonsensical.

Fighting, by itself, is neither honorable nor dishonorable. Why you choose to fight is what determines whether or not the fight is an honorable one. In this case, since it's my pride that has been stung, and since fighting would not settle the truth or falsity of his claim, it would not be honorable to fight my accusor -- not even if he's lying about me.

One can easily imagine circumstances in which it would be dishonorable to refuse to fight someone, but this isn't one of them.



Why is there no honor to be gained in fighting my accuser? Well, if he's correct and I am a dirty, no-good liar, then fighting him won't change that. Indeed, it makes me an even more dishonorable person, because I'm trying to force him to recant a truthful statement.

If he's lying and I'm telling the truth, then I still can gain no honor by fighting him, because the truth of the matter is not determined by the outcome of a fight.



The simple truth of the matter is that you cannot "fight for honor." There are times when fighting is an honorable thing to do, and there are times when it is a dishonorable thing to do, but you cannot fight for honor.


99 times out of 100, when someone offers to fight over a matter of "honor," it isn't honor that motivates them, it's ego or pride. The fact of the matter is that I gain no honor from fighting someone who has insulted me, even if I know I'm in the right and that he's lying.



Where did the notion arise that an "insult" to one's honor must be redressed by fighting? I suspect it's a remnant of the mediaeval notion that God will always grant victory in any conflict to the one who's in the right. Trial by Combat was considered a perfectly acceptable way to determine who was in the right and who wasn't -- because it was assumed that God would always grant victory to the one who was in the right.


Of course, if God always grants victory to the one who's in the right, then a refusal to fight would naturally be viewed as a tacit admission of guilt. So, over time, a refusal to fight when challenged became associated with the notion that the person who refused to fight was "obviously" a dishonorable person.

Thus was born the nonsensical notion that one can (and should) fight for honor. It's a notion that truly makes sense only if you believe in a god or gods who ensure that only the one who's "in the right" wins. (Under these circumstances, a draw was often regarded as evidence that it was all a misunderstanding after all, and both fighters could retire from the field confident that they were, indeed, honorable men.)


Of course, you have to wonder how seriously anyone took the notion even back in the day. It's always amusing to read Le Morte d'Arthur, for instance, and hear all the knights going on endlessly about how every slight insult (even if unintentional) must be redressed by a fight. So, the two antagonists launch into big speeches about how God always favors the one who's in the right, and therefore a dishonest/dishonorable man cannot hope to win against an honest/honorable one -- no matter who his opponent might be.

So, just as soon as the antagonists finish insisting that a dishonest man cannot hope to beat an honest one, what do they do? They run to Sir Lancelot and beg him to fight on their behalf! The blatant contradiction between their stated beliefs and their actions never fails to amuse.




That's one reason why I pretty-much detest the stupid, testosterone-addled Klingons on the "Next-Generation"-era Star Trek shows. They bloviate endlessly about "honor" when it's blatantly clear that few of them, if any, have the slightest idea what honor is actually about.

Honor has nothing to do with your eagerness to fight. Indeed, an eagerness to fight over every perceived slight is usually a sign of excessive pride and egotism. Often, it's an attempt to hide insecurity.


Honor is a personal thing. The only person who can do anything at all to take honor from me is myself. That's why the notion of fighting "for honor" is nonsensical. I lose honor by behaving in a dishonorable manner, and I gain honor by behaving in an honorable manner -- and nothing that anyone else can do either takes away from or adds to my honor one jot.


Cheers,

Michael

[beyelzu]

12

[beyelzu]

12

[Sock Puppet]

When you become astute, then I'll care what you have to say.Translation: When you agree with everything I emit, then I'll care what you have to say.

[beyelzu]

im such an indecisive bastard

[BDS]

Honor is a personal thing. The only person who can do anything at all to take honor from me is myself. That's why the notion of fighting "for honor" is nonsensical. I lose honor by behaving in a dishonorable manner, and I gain honor by behaving in an honorable manner -- and nothing that anyone else can do either takes away from or adds to my honor one jot.

The notion that BECAUSE the only person who can take honor away from you is yourself, fighting for honor is nonsensical is a non sequitur. Why would one follow from the other? It’s easy to think of any number of situations where refusing to fight might be “dishonorable”. Refusing to fight for a just cause out of cowardice, for example, is “dishonorable”. Otherwise, the word “honor” has no meaning.

In addition, I’m not sure that honor is a purely personal thing. Looking in my dictionary, I see synonyms like: “glory”, “respect”, “credit”, “high regard” and “esteem.” None of these are personal. They all imply some sort of SOCIAL or CULTURAL meaning to the word.

In fact, the word “honor” is an old fashioned word, implying accordance with the values of the Knights that TLR ridicules. No doubt the Knights were Prideful (as Michael suggests). No doubt they were egotistical. They guarded their honor manfully as a result.

[The Lone Ranger]

The notion that BECAUSE the only person who can take honor away from you is yourself, fighting for honor is nonsensical is a non sequitur. Why would one follow from the other? It’s easy to think of any number of situations where refusing to fight might be “dishonorable”. Refusing to fight for a just cause out of cowardice, for example, is “dishonorable”. Otherwise, the word “honor” has no meaning.

I'm pretty sure I said that.


Maybe I should have clarified that I meant personal honor, which is indeed something that cannot be fought for in the sense that I cannot fight "for honor." I can fight to defend someone, for instance, which is honorable, but I'm not fighting for honor in that case.

Cheers,

Michael

[xyza]

Oh I wish people didn't keep changing names on this place ... I've never done that :whistles:

ms_ann_thrope, I really just have a problem with the issues mental health has around sex, still not having read the thread in question (I can't read anything she says unless it's quoted) I do not see sex as a big taboo. I never hide the fact that I enjoy pain, that doesn't make me a freak or mean I have a mental health issue though, I even talk about it sometimes should the topic arise, I enjoy sex.
If my patients come to me and start tallking about sex as long as it is in an appropriate context and discussion I don't run screaming for the hills, sex isn't such a 'socially unexceptable' topic anymore.

*Walks off to make coffee singing Salt 'n' Pepper to herself* :singing:

[The Lone Ranger]

Of course, "honor" is a nebulous concept in the first place, and there are lots of different ways that the word can be interpreted ...

[BDS]

Of course, "honor" is a nebulous concept in the first place, and there are lots of different ways that the word can be interpreted ...

Exactly. It seems to me that if we use the word as most Native English speakers use it, it suggests a sort of old fashioned pride like that of Lancelot, Roland, and Ogier the Dane. They certainly talked about honor constantly, and felt that fighting was a good way to defend it. We may disagree with their violent and prideful ways, but we should probably use a different word to express our different values.

[The Lone Ranger]

Exactly. It seems to me that if we use the word as most Native English speakers use it, it suggests a sort of old fashioned pride like that of Lancelot, Roland, and Ogier the Dane. They certainly talked about honor constantly, and felt that fighting was a good way to defend it. We may disagree with their violent and prideful ways, but we should probably use a different word to express our different values.

Precisely so. My interpretation of what most English-speaking people mean when they say "honor" is actually "pride." My concept is closer to the Japanese term "reigi", a part of the concept of bushido. It's often (though rather sloppily, in my opinion) translated into English as "honor."

Not a very good word to use for a very nuanced concept.

Cheers,

Michael

[Ymir's blood]

I think the notion of dueling comes from the idea that a man who will defend himself is less likely to be treated rudely. More modern ideas of fighting and honor are corruptions of that. The original reason has been lost but the practice continues, like many other traditions.

Of course, hot headed people tend to want to settle everything with violence, regardless of tradition. Dueling was a way of enforcing some order in how that was expressed. Pistols at dawn are a lot less disruptive to society than midnight ambushes and brawls in the street.

[The Lone Ranger]

An interesting corollary to that is that, as Heinlein said, "An armed society is a polite society."

While we can certainly disagree about the morality of fighting over perceived insults, it would seem to be the case that in a society where large numbers of people were armed and trained in the use of those arms, courtesy was valued very highly. After all, if you know that insulting someone might cost you your life, you have a strong motivation to be polite and respectful.


In Japanese society, a good way to gauge that notion would be to observe how the samurai treated others. They were legendarily courteous to each other (unsurprising, since most of them were armed and trained in how to use those weapons), but legendarily discourteous to peasants, who were forbidden to carry arms openly.

The notion of bushido is a wonderful one. But it has been very-much romaticized. Alas, the samurai were by no means a bunch of selfless servants of the people who treated everyone -- commoner and nobleman alike -- with sincere courtesy and respect, despite what movies like The Last Samurai would have you believe.


Cheers,

Michael

[Pendaric]

I'd just like to say that whilst I disagree with Sweetie in most of her opinions, and I can understand how her turn of phrase upsets people, I have a lot of respect for her.

In any thread I see it's her by herself against a mob, and I think she does a pretty good job in standing up for herself.

That's not to excuse the rudeness, insults and patronising posts she makes, but I can understand how being attacked by a dozen people at once who are themselves being insulting can provoke that.

It's boring having a discussion if everybody is pounding the same point. Often Sweetie provides the unpopular viewpoint, and fights her corner remarkably well. As said, I don't often agree with her viewpoint, but kudos for fighting the fight.

Good for you Sweetie. Might not make me popular, but I think this board is a better place for having you around.

[viscousmemories]

In any thread I see it's her by herself against a mob, and I think she does a pretty good job in standing up for herself.

That's not to excuse the rudeness, insults and patronising posts she makes, but I can understand how being attacked by a dozen people at once who are themselves being insulting can provoke that.
The reason she's so often standing alone against a group isn't because her opinions are unpopular, it's because of the consistently aggressive, vindictive, self-obssessed delivery of her opinions. And it wasn't always her against nearly everyone else. Once upon a time a lot more people made an effort to interact with her reasonably, myself included. IMO Sweetie has earned the disrespect of every person who antagonizes her here through her own sweat and others' blood and tears. I respectfully disagree that her ability to hurt and offend nearly everyone she interacts with makes this forum a better place. On the contrary, I have found her presence consistently detrimental to the community here since the day she registered.

[Pendaric]

This sentence here:

Once upon a time a lot more people made an effort to interact with her reasonably, myself included.

would not seem to sit comfortably with this sentence here:

I have found her presence consistently detrimental to the community here since the day she registered.


Not necessarily logically inconsistent, but not sitting comfortably with each other either.

Anyway, my intention is not to get in to a row about the rights and wrongs of historic flame wars. As said, I can see how Sweetie's posting style has contributed to her position here. Nonetheless, I stand by my original posting - she is generally fighting her corner against a lot of people, and doing that pretty well, all things considering.

[Shelli]

She's fighting from a corner she painted herself into. Whose fault is that?

[Pendaric]

She's fighting from a corner she painted herself into. Whose fault is that?

In most threads I read she's having to fight on two fronts - the debate itself, and then crap from people who don't like her. Maybe it's deserved - I don't know, I wasn't around and I have no intention of trawling old threads to find out.

I'm not being the judge here. I'm not saying Sweetie is a blameless angel and all others are bastards. I've acknowledged that Sweetie is less than courteous in her posting style. I can well believe she's the architect of her own situation, although I'm not going to make assumptions about long dead threads I haven't read for myself/

But that still doesn't mean I can't give kudos when I see someone fighting against the crowd, and generally doing it quite well.

[Shelli]

But that still doesn't mean I can't give kudos when I see someone fighting against the crowd, and generally doing it quite well.
If by "well" you mean "like a rabid dog", I agree with you.

[godfry n. glad]

Of course, "honor" is a nebulous concept in the first place, and there are lots of different ways that the word can be interpreted ...

Such as: "...and it was 'honor' and 'offer' all afternoon."

[viscousmemories]

I essentially said "her behavior has been detrimental to the community since day one" and "once upon a time more people attempted to engage her in spite of her behavior". I don't see why those ideas wouldn't be comfortable next to each other.

I suppose I don't really understand what the kudos are for, is my thing. I agree that she's often faced with numerous simultaneous antagonists in threads, but in what way does she handle it quite well? As far as I can tell she gets increasingly aggressive, nasty, and incoherent the more excited she gets, and she's not particularly well-spoken or coherent when she's calm.

[Ymir's blood]

In Japanese society, a good way to gauge that notion would be to observe how the samurai treated others. They were legendarily courteous to each other (unsurprising, since most of them were armed and trained in how to use those weapons), but legendarily discourteous to peasants, who were forbidden to carry arms openly.

The notion of bushido is a wonderful one. But it has been very-much romaticized. Alas, the samurai were by no means a bunch of selfless servants of the people who treated everyone -- commoner and nobleman alike -- with sincere courtesy and respect, despite what movies like The Last Samurai would have you believe.
The same is pretty much true of armed groups in general. The European knight generally acted the same.

ETA: Michael, could you identify the primate in my avatar? It's from ZooAtlanta but can't remember what the sign said.

[D. Scarlatti]

But that still doesn't mean I can't give kudos when I see someone fighting against the crowd, and generally doing it quite well.

The funny thing about this thread is Sweetie charging in seeking to undermine Legs's reasons for ignoring TJL, which are entirely Legs's reasons, and Legs's reasons alone, and then actually going so far as interpreting the effect of Legs's ignoring TJL as indicating that what it means is that TJL is "worthless." All of that is purely made up by the fevered brain of Sweetie.

The giant irony of this stems from the gigantic issue Sweetie has made about her desire to ignore certain posters, based on her reasons -- which, of course, are logically unassailable, as opposed to Legs's reasons, which are non-existent -- the effect of which she couldn't give two shits about. And she's still blabbering away about the people she wants to ignore! I don't see what there is to admire about such blatant hypocrisy.

[The Lone Ranger]

It's definitely in the baboon family. It might be an Olive Baboon (Papio anubis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Olive_baboon.jpg)), but the fur coloration and facial features don't quite look right, as far as I can tell. My other guess is that it's a Drill (Mandrillus leucophaeus (http://homepage.mac.com/wildlifeweb/primate/photos/Cercopithecidae/drill.jpg)). That looks like a better match, given the facial features and fur color.

But drills are very endangered, and I'd be surprised if ZooAtlanta has any.


Ah, according to their website, ZooAtlanta does have a drill. So that must be it.

Cheers,

Michael

[quiet bear]

all right, folks, move along. Nothing to see here, break it up, break it up.



http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a115/jr008/barney-fife-sm.jpg

[Widget]

It's definitely in the baboon family. It might be an Olive Baboon (Papio anubis), but the fur coloration and facial features don't quite look right, as far as I can tell. My other guess is that it's a Drill (Mandrillus leucophaeus). That looks like a better match, given the facial features and fur color.

("This does not necessarily represent TLR's opinion")

[Anastasia Beaverhausen]

/me snerks

[yguy]

Even non-Christians can change the way they feel about something, with help. For example, feelings fade over time, unless they are restimulated. E.g. if you are depressed over the breakup of a relationship, you might feel sad. Your choices about your behavior can have an indirect influence over those feelings. If you sit slumped over in a darkened room and play "our song" over and over, it would not be surprising to find yourself slipping into depression, and restimulating the feelings of sadness. Otoh, if you go out for a long walk, visit with friends, take on an intellectual challenge, do a good turn for someone else, and so on, you can indirectly diminish or change the sad feelings.

How does one discern between actually diminishing such feelings and merely distracting one's self from them while they continue to fester in one's subconscious?

[Petra]

How does one discern between actually diminishing such feelings and merely distracting one's self from them while they continue to fester in one's subconscious?

I think this is a good question, and I'm not sure it can be done without some sort of resolution and/or closure to that which is causing the pain. Sure, we can diminish the time spent dwelling on an issue by the practice of distraction that finally leads to letting something go, but that can be a very slow road, and not necessarily the least painful or 'best' route. But as with all things human, it can be hard to tell sometimes. We can only be in control (or out of control) of our own perceptions and feelings. Or something. I think. :shrug:

[xyza]

But that still doesn't mean I can't give kudos when I see someone fighting against the crowd, and generally doing it quite well.

The funny thing about this thread is Sweetie charging in seeking to undermine Legs's reasons for ignoring TJL, which are entirely Legs's reasons, and Legs's reasons alone, and then actually going so far as interpreting the effect of Legs's ignoring TJL as indicating that what it means is that TJL is "worthless." All of that is purely made up by the fevered brain of Sweetie.

The giant irony of this stems from the gigantic issue Sweetie has made about her desire to ignore certain posters, based on her reasons -- which, of course, are logically unassailable, as opposed to Legs's reasons, which are non-existent -- the effect of which she couldn't give two shits about. And she's still blabbering away about the people she wants to ignore! I don't see what there is to admire about such blatant hypocrisy.Thanks for that, I was beginning to think I'd have to change my settings to see why the thread had become a 'sweetie' thread, it's one of her great talents, changing a thread that is about something/one else into a thread where it's all about her ... Okay I know this one isn't but it's got a great deal of sweetie posts.

[Miss Shelby]

Thanks for that, I was beginning to think I'd have to change my settings to see why the thread had become a 'sweetie' thread, it's one of her great talents, changing a thread that is about something/one else into a thread where it's all about her ... Okay I know this one isn't but it's got a great deal of sweetie posts.
It is one of her great talents, however she would not be able to pull 99 percent of the self absorbed shit that she does if people would just NOT indulge her the time of day.

[D. Scarlatti]

She tends to stymie the implementation of the restraint you recommend by dropping as many usernames into her little tirades as humanly possible, whether they have anything to do with the discussion or not.

[Sweetie]

The corner I'm fighting from is the one that says it's ok to dump on and villify one guy, while completely blow his participation out of proportion, while compltely ignoring the fact that the other person is not innocent, and then, when insults are responded to with insults, it's all about how nasty another person is for being insulting, and no one here has any blame but the other guy.

I don't fight for honour, I fight for reason and justice and sometimes, just plain ol' boredom, but that's beside the point.

[Sweetie]

She tends to stymie the implementation of the restraint you recommend by dropping as many usernames into her little tirades as humanly possible, whether they have anything to do with the discussion or not.

Nah, it's more like, I risk, and may it be acknowledged, a ton of displeasure and crap, in order to try to get people to recognize that it is:

a) a mob
b) that what they are whining about the other person, they are more guilty of themselves

and to:

c) divert the mob so they focus on somebody else.
d) highlight how hypocritical the mob is being, mob mentality isn't all that reasonable though.

You know what I think?

I think we need some new targets around here. I think some of you would make very, very nice targets indeed, being such hypocritical bastards.

I think we should put names in a hat, and pick who we are going to pick on today, that way, it's a little more fair, no?

[wei yau]

:frfr:

[D. Scarlatti]

If I hated this place and everything connected with that much, I'd put the whole mob in a hat, fuck the hat, fuck the mob, fuck it all, and take my leave. Problems solved.

[Stormlight]

I think we should put names in a hat, and pick who we are going to pick on today, that way, it's a little more fair, no?

Oh, a bit like Secret Santa, then! Fire up Excel, Liv!

[Julie]

Thats what I don't understand. If people hate this place, the people, the admins so much why oh why do they stick around?

And after making it very clear that they don't like this place, it's people and its admin, do they expect us to like and respond positively to them?

If I felt that way I would go find a board I did like full of people I do like.

[Sweetie]

Thats what I don't understand. If people hate this place, the people, the admins so much why oh why do they stick around?

And after making it very clear that they don't like this place, it's people and its admin, do they expect us to like and respond positively to them?

If I felt that way I would go find a board I did like full of people I do like.

Maybe it's a principle thing?

I'll clue you in, here's one example.

So I know this guy from other places, I use his first name on the boards, no complaints but then, we decide we're not on good terms anymore, though I still refer to him by his first name, because that's how I always did.

So he's being an ass and decides to make an issue out of it, and whoever decides whatever, vm or livius drusus decide to edit my post to remove his first name by claiming it's private information.

I make squeaking noises saying that, no, it's not.

You know what I do? I PM livius drusus privately and link her to a link at this site. This guy has posted a link to his workplace basically, which gives out this information:

a) his first name
b) his last name
c) where he works
d) the city he lives in
e) pictures of himself
f) the places where he's going to be in the future

Not only that, but he says, "Hey, anybody want to come meet me or see us or stop in, feel free."

I made this private, just in case he regretted posting all that private information, and I ask her to let him know that he has, if he wants to remove it.

The point is, what I expected was livius to say, ok, you're right, that cannot be construed as private information since he's already given out all this information publicly.

So, I'm vindicated, right? Evidence, the best evidence possible.

But no, she don't say nothing in public, she don't apologize, in fact she's all nice and chummy with him the next day.

Hell, I would have felt really bad if it was private information I gave out, that's important to me not to and in the end, I would have said, you're wrong that it's private information, however, I do not feel comfortable using your proper name if you don't want me to, and that would have been the end of it......but knowing liv, nah, things couldn't have been that fair, or simple.


One example, amongst many.

For the record, I have friends here, I have people who privately will PM me and say I agree with you, or I actually don't think you're crazy or whatever, so just because I disapprove of this mob mentality, dislike both mods equally, and think of some of you are just absolutely ridiculous, does not mean that I have no other interests here.

[wei yau]

I'm guessing that little blast from the past had nothing to do with mob mentality. After all, it was between you, this guy, liv and it was handled all via PM.

I can see why you felt that the informaiton was private, even though it was public on another site and not here. I can certainly see that you didn't act maliciously. But, in the end, if the guy didn't want that information here on the FF, then wouldn't it be simply right to respect his wishes and just let it be?

You recognized at least that much, as you were willing to convey this information to liv via PM instead of a public post, so surely you can extend that grace just a little bit and recognize that for his own reasons he didn't want that information revealed here at the FF.

[Tanda]

Yeah, that.

[Sock Puppet]

There's a monstrously long thread about that very event in the archives, if anybody wants to wade through it. I found it very instructive about several of the members here. It has fuckall to do with the topic of this thread, but that fell by the wayside quite awhile ago anyway.

[Sweetie]

I can see why you felt that the informaiton was private, even though it was public on another site and not here. I can certainly see that you didn't act maliciously. But, in the end, if the guy didn't want that information here on the FF, then wouldn't it be simply right to respect his wishes and just let it be?

No man, you missed the point. He had, fairly recently at the time, at this site, posted all that other information, including his first and last name, where he works, where he's going to be because he invited us or whomever was reading and who would be around, to come see him.

In that case, it couldn't even, under any standards, be considered private information, the squeaking that he did was ridiculous, being edited was ridiculous. He wanted the information here, he put it here, he was just trying to get me to look bad by any means, and liv helped him.

You recognized at least that much, as you were willing to convey this information to liv via PM instead of a public post, so surely you can extend that grace just a little bit and recognize that for his own reasons he didn't want that information revealed here at the FF.

That's the problem, he did want that information here because he put it here, he never said he didn't, and he never asked her to take down the link after I pointed her to it, therefore he didn't have a problem with private information here, he just had a problem with me, and was playing others to try and make it look like I did a big no-no, and I didn't, and I proved it, and there was no apologies, or fixing things for me, only......what liv always does. In other words, from the get-go there has been an extreme lack of fairness here, even on the part of the mods. I think liv just wants to have fun, and not get embroiled in these things. Too bad.

[Tanda]

:lolly: My on-topic contribution was in my sig.

I think I'll put this thread on ignore.

[Sock Puppet]

It was the removal of one word, from one post. One. Lousy. Word. Oh, the humanity. :drama:

[Tanda]

:giggle:

[Sweetie]

Hell, you know what set me off on vm? Adora.

For months and months I let most of her crap slide, but then I decided, you know what? Fuck her, I'll take her on.

Vm has the audacity to criticize me for insulting Adora. Adora! Can you believe it? This situation as it stands, is two years in the making, but I never was like this, I never needed to be, until I decided to take on Adora, and then it's all my fault, according to vm.

Adora who shits on everybody for no reason at all, and vm calls me to account for daring to insult Adora. I mean, what the hell is that? It's flabbergasting what some of you see when you look at some of these cases. What the hell do I care about the judgement of people like that, and how can I respect that?

I can't, so there's no respect.

[Sweetie]

It was the removal of one word, from one post. One. Lousy. Word. Oh, the humanity. :drama:

It was the unfair accusation by a judge/administrator, who failed to make it clear that she had publicly made a mistake.

That's just one example, the easiest one to describe and bring up. One, that's all I'm interested in is showing that I have justification for whatever I feel, and this is just one of many examples. I'm not interested in the long drawn out process of trying to prove any of these things to some of you who, I'm just saying, look man, I have my reasons.

[Tanda]

I'm sorry. I just can't help myself. :giggle:

I'm not interested in the long drawn out process of trying to prove any of these things :hysteric:

[Sweetie]

I'm sorry. I just can't help myself. :giggle:

I'm not interested in the long drawn out process of trying to prove any of these things :hysteric:

Dude, you think that is long? That's nothing, the bare minimum of what it takes for someone else to understand something.

I realize you probably would prefer that nothing gets understood, and y'all just keep mocking because it's simpler and for you, more fun, but I like things a different way and this is a minimum. I could say much, much more.

I find it amusing that some of you think I'm terrible because of some of my insults. If only some of you knew, you would be applauding me for my restraint because I could say so much more, and I often think much, much worse.

[Sock Puppet]

I could say so much more, and I often think much, much worse.Of that I have absolutely no doubt.

[Tanda]

Dude, you think that is long?
I'm a chick.

I realize you probably would prefer that nothing gets understood, and y'all just keep mocking because it's simpler and for you, more fun...

Bingo!!

ETA: I was nice enough to clip your quote so that readers wouldn't have to *scroll, scroll, scroll* to reach the end. Sometimes less is more. Yeah? :D

[maddog]

I'm sorry. I just can't help myself. :giggle:

I'm not interested in the long drawn out process of trying to prove any of these things :hysteric:

I'm sorry. I just can't help myself.

Actually, this is not strictly true. The moment between stimulus and response is the moment when you have the power to choose what you will do. This is the moment Frankl was talking about.

#1019

[Sweetie]

I'm a chick.

I am perfectly aware that you are a chick. Hell, I'm even aware that you are married with three kids, fancy that.

I have a question for you, that is such basic information, no?

What would motivate someone to keep such simple information quiet or mostly to themselves?

Bingo!!

What's your point? I'm aware some of you who are interested in the fellowship of this place and not the politics or the more intense discussions and personal conflicts but like to speak up long enough to say you're not interested, and to pick sides based on nothing but a casual opinion with no real foundation, and then play it. We all know this, we all are not stupid, which is why we recognize that the amount of participation or even the amount of people against anything at any time is itself, meaningless. Most of us are perfectly aware.

So, keep playing with your compadres and contributing nothing meaningful to important things, and I'll keep contributing something meaningful against your compadres, and we're both happy, n'est pas?

ETA: I was nice enough to clip your quote so that readers wouldn't have to *scroll, scroll, scroll* to reach the end. Sometimes less is more. Yeah? :D

Sometimes, not even even close to always or necessarily in cases such as this.

[Sweetie]

It was the removal of one word, from one post. One. Lousy. Word. Oh, the humanity. :drama:

Actually, I would say if you can't even expect her to act decently or judge accurately about such a small issue, in means she is even more less likely to do so about a big issue.

[Sock Puppet]

And I would say, if you can't keep perspective on such a small issue without spinning out into pages and pages of drama and misplaced martyrdom, you are even less likely to keep perspective on a big issue.

[yguy]

I think some of you would make very, very nice targets indeed, being such hypocritical bastards.

I agree that there are much more deserving "targets" than yourself...but once the target is plastered with rotten eggs or riddled with bullet holes, then what? I mean, how are you better off, let alone anyone else?

[Tanda]

contributing nothing meaningful to important things

Hun, this thread became unimportant pages ago. Adios. :gday:

[Shelli]

oooh! It's lunchtime soon! Yay! :hungry:

[yguy]

It was the removal of one word, from one post. One. Lousy. Word. Oh, the humanity. :drama:

Actually, I would say if you can't even expect her to act decently or judge accurately about such a small issue, in means she is even more less likely to do so about a big issue.

All I know is, liv backed me up in a dispute with another poster awhile back. Considering where she's coming from ideologically versus where I'm coming from, I'd say that was better than decent.

And even vm had enough decency to delete a Sweetie-bashing thread he started. ;)

[Sweetie]

I agree that there are much more deserving "targets" than yourself...but once the target is plastered with rotten eggs or riddled with bullet holes, then what? I mean, how are you better off, let alone anyone else?

I'm not better off, that's the problem. With some of these people, there is no better off for me. It never really mattered if my behavior was above reproach or not, the same people will still dish out the same crap, and the same misunderstandings still exist irregardless. It doesn't matter if I can prove myself justified, it never mattered whether or not I'm right or wrong about anything.

However, TJL has someone defending him. Hell, I've even been in chat sometimes, as soon as he leaves, some of the children in this place are speaking bad about him, so I assume they do the same thing to me. It's very uncomfortable and embarassing to be around that.

For the record TJL, lets chat some time. :yup:

Some people admire my guts. I would prefer to be friends with people who do, instead of admiring the degree of which I can ignore hypocrasy in order to have a whole bunch of superficial people like me on a very superficial level.

[Shelli]

All I know is, liv backed me up in a dispute with another poster awhile back. Considering where she's coming from ideologically versus where I'm coming from, I'd say that was better than decent.
Yes, she did, and I'm still mad at her! Big meanie! :rollpin:

[Sweetie]

All I know is, liv backed me up in a dispute with another poster awhile back. Considering where she's coming from ideologically versus where I'm coming from, I'd say that was better than decent.

*cough*

Yeah, she'll do that sometimes. She's alternately defended me or been tactfully against me in the past. I have my reasons for considering her behavior one more of protecting her own emotional equilibrium and playing the diplomat to protect and smooth out things at FF, moreso than anything else.

She was a little more open when I came here, and there were a few who really disliked her and if she would have continued to be so, there would be more who did. When someone self-describes as a tight-lipped bitch, there might actually be some truth to that. She's more diplomatic now see, and she's smart enough to recognize that there are people like me around. :wink: Or perhaps maybe she learned not to post when she's high.


And even vm had enough decency to delete a Sweetie-bashing thread he started. ;)

Yes, livius seems to be able to manage him well, no?

[Shelli]

Vegetable lasagna for lunch. Yumma! :eat:

[yguy]

However, TJL has someone defending him.

From what I've seen, that's the last thing in the world he needs. Seriously.

Hell, I've even been in chat sometimes, as soon as he leaves, some of the children in this place are speaking bad about him, so I assume they do the same thing to me. It's very uncomfortable and embarassing to be around that.

I have as much reason to make that assumption about myself as you do about him. What do I care? After all,

“The only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about.”

~ some 19th century poofter. :cool:

[yguy]

*cough*...

Obviously there is much about both of them that I'm not aware of...but if I see something good in a person, I try to relate to it; and as long as I don't let whatever may be bad in them get to me, I can.

[Sock Puppet]

It's a shame Sweetie and Gurdur don't get along. They're cut from the same rancid cloth.

[Shelli]

It's a shame Sweetie and Gurdur don't get along. They're cut from the same rancid cloth.
:LOL:

I suppose it would be bad taste to put this in the quote generator. :darn:

[Tanda]

Vegetable lasagna for lunch. Yumma! :eat:

:giggles:

Hey, Shel, I just started a vegetarian diet. I haven't lost a pound. But I feel good about eating healthier.

I slipped the night before last and fried some chicken breasts. I sprinkled some seasoning in dry pancake mix, dipped and fried the breast in extra dry olive oil, and then melted a slice of provolone on top. :woopsie:

:meatcook: :larrow: "Why can't I quit you???"

[Sweetie]

From what I've seen, that's the last thing in the world he needs. Seriously.

*shrug*

I could very well be lacking some information. I have not seen much about him that was really dislikable. He gets maybe a bit enthusiastic sometimes, but he certainly comes accross to me as a good person.



I have as much reason to make that assumption about myself as you do about him. What do I care? After all,

“The only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about.”

~ some 19th century poofter. :cool:

Oh, well yes, there's that. But there still is the question of the accuracy of the judgements that get thrown around this place, the childishness, and the unfairness.

[Petra]

...but if I see something good in a person, I try to relate to it; and as long as I don't let whatever may be bad in them get to me, I can.

Despite my periodic screw ups, I do too. In fact, half of my periodic screw ups are caused by this alone. :doh:


Also; beware, yguy. I may be developing a crush on you.

It's a funny ol' world.

[Shelli]

Vegetable lasagna for lunch. Yumma! :eat:

:giggles:

Hey, Shel, I just started a vegetarian diet. I haven't lost a pound. But I feel good about eating healthier.

I slipped the night before last and fried some chicken breasts. I sprinkled some seasoning in dry pancake mix, dipped and fried the breast in extra dry olive oil, and then melted a slice of provolone on top. :woopsie:

:meatcook: :larrow: "Why can't I quit you???"
Oh, wow, that chicken dish sounds awesome. :hungry:

I had gone vegetarian at one point for the health aspects and just because at that time, meat was grossing me out. :dunno:

Now I eat some meat but still love vegetarian dishes. :yum:

[Sweetie]

And so the question is, why aren't any of you looking for the good in TJL or myself?

Who is looking for that in TJL, but myself? And why does everybody ignore the bad in Legs and Widget, and only see the bad in me?

That too, strikes me as decidedly hypocritical.

[D. Scarlatti]

"there still is the question of the accuracy of the judgements that get thrown around this place"

:ironymeter:

[Sweetie]

All I know is, liv backed me up in a dispute with another poster awhile back. Considering where she's coming from ideologically versus where I'm coming from, I'd say that was better than decent.

And even vm had enough decency to delete a Sweetie-bashing thread he started. ;)

And it must be admitted, in both of those cases, neither of them admitted to wrong.

liv could offer her opinion without admitting that as an administrator, she was wrong about something.

vm said he didn't do that because liv thought it would be too negative, not that he didn't want to, or that it would be wrong to.

[Tanda]

Oh, wow, that chicken dish sounds awesome. :hungry: It was pretty, too! I took a pic to share the recipe on FF, but Joe accidently deleted it. Booger. :whup:
I had gone vegetarian at one point for the health aspects and just because at that time, meat was grossing me out. :dunno:

Now I eat some meat but still love vegetarian dishes. :yum:
I'm enjoying every moment. Although, I do get hungry more often. :sadcheer:

[Petra]

....but he certainly comes accross to me as a good person.

That's what I once thought.

But a lot has changed this past weekend, and I'm thinking differently about a few people. Some for the better, some for the worse.

...the childishness, and the unfairness.

Both of which you have contributed to and exacerbated.

You seem to think you are above such things, but your record of posting here shows you are not.

[Veritas]

May I post something childish and hypocritical here please?

[Sock Puppet]

And so the question is, why aren't any of you looking for the good in TJL or myself?I did see some good in TJL, mixed in with the insecurity and self-absorption. However, in your case, you are such a spiteful, vindictive, self-deluded viper that there's no point in looking for a tiny pearl amongst the sewage.

[Tanda]

May I post something childish and hypocritical here please?

:nuhuh: No! You haven't been invited. You have cooties anyway. :bleh:

[Veritas]

May I post something childish and hypocritical here please?

:nuhuh: No! You haven't been invited. You have cooties anyway. :bleh:

Just as well I'm not an oversensitive attention seeker. :sadcheer:

[yguy]

Also; beware, yguy. I may be developing a crush on you.

In case you're serious, I'm flattered as all get out, of course; but I do not encourage such feelings. When a good natured woman (as I believe you are) sees something good in a man, she tends to want to cling to it, never realizing that the same good is wating to be discovered right there inside her, and with no interpersonal strings attached.

And besides, you'd find me a lot less impressive in person, believe me. ;)

[Petra]

:laugh:

We're ALL a lot less impressive in person, I am sure.


Anyway, too late. I'm totally hot for you. You WILL be mine! :muahaha:


;)

[maddog]

And so the question is, why aren't any of you looking for the good in TJL or myself?Objection, misstates the record. Plenty of people have looked for AND FOUND good in you and in TJL.

Who is looking for that in TJL, but myself? You've got some awesome post-search skills and tenacity. I'm sure if you applied them, you could find plenty of people who have been nice to TJL, encouraged TJL, admired TJL's good qualities, and so on. And why does everybody ignore the bad in Legs and Widget, and only see the bad in me?

That too, strikes me as decidedly hypocritical.Objection, facts not in evidence. Just using myself for an example, and not related specifically to Legs or Widget, I have seen plenty of people whom I like and admire do some things that I don't like and don't admire. Sometimes I even tell them so, privately, and I've even had some acknowledge their mistake and change their behavior. I'm perfectly able to see that I have my own faults as well. When I do wrong, I apologize, and then rectify it to the best of my ability. In general, I give people a huge benefit of the doubt, because I know I'm no paragon myself. Your statement strikes me as hyperbolic ("everybody"... "only"), and not reflective of the complexity of dynamics in relationships.

#1020

[Roland98]

[delurks]

Y'know, I don't recall ever having an exchange with Sweetie. I've largely watched from the sidelines because the whole thing is rather absurd to me. I've been in the minority before--hell, I started out on forums by posting on christianity.com, which was not exactly a haven of Christian love and charity--but I've never seen it quite like Sweetie's. Can you even see your *own* hypocrisy and childishness, or are you too busy castigating others for theirs? Even when I've seen a reasonable point or two in the posts I've read, it's inevitably followed by stupid, pointless barbs like these:

Or perhaps maybe she learned not to post when she's high.

***

Yes, livius seems to be able to manage him well, no?

while in the next breath discussing

children, childish behavior, hypocrisy, etc...

:ironymeter:

It's just too much.

[/relurks]

[Plant Woman]

Quote:
And even vm had enough decency to delete a Sweetie-bashing thread he started. ;)


Yes, livius seems to be able to manage him well, no?

Oh brother. He started that thread because YOU requested it. I repeat, YOU requested it. But lets not convolute this thread with the facts, eh?

He and a few others had second thoughts about that thread, and wisely so, he took it down.

[yguy]

And so the question is, why aren't any of you looking for the good in TJL or myself?

What's good in you, I can see. What's good in TJL I haven't seen yet...and from what I have seen, looking for it isn't worth the effort.

[Leesifer]

May I post something childish and hypocritical here please?

NO!

[Sweetie]

You've got some awesome post-search skills and tenacity.

I have a good memory.

I'm sure if you applied them, you could find plenty of people who have been nice to TJL, encouraged TJL, admired TJL's good qualities, and so on.

Nah man, I'm talking about right now. Who is speaking up for TJL trying to see where he's coming from, and who is acknowledging that Legs and Widget are by far, not above reproach, even of the accusations people are making of TJL, which can be thrown right back at Legs, so what's the point, if they're both guilty?

In fact, I would argue that Legs is the most guilty, if there really is any guilt on TJL's part.

And my real problem, why when the mob has it's blood up, do most of you who disagree with the mob keep your mouths shut?

[yguy]

I could very well be lacking some information. I have not seen much about him that was really dislikable.

I find his apparent obsession with Legs very dislikable indeed...although actually I think "creepy" is closer to the mark. If I were Widget I'd sure as hell be doing a background check on the guy.

Oh, well yes, there's that. But there still is the question of the accuracy of the judgements that get thrown around this place, the childishness, and the unfairness.

You can't do anything about that. All you can do is make sure there isn't a log in your own eye. ;)

[Sweetie]

I find his apparent obsession with Legs very dislikable indeed...although actually I think "creepy" is closer to the mark. If I were Widget I'd sure as hell be doing a background check on the guy.

Haha, that's amusing. Legs and TJL are a short term thing, and he has a problem for the same reason he always did. His point is basically, "Legs, you would prefer I don't exist?" and so, he's making his existence clear and present and bothersome to Legs because of her absurdity.

Yet, me and D. Scarlatti are a long-term thing, yet........you were against me when I'm saying that D. Scarlatti can't get over the fact that I aggravate him and was following me from thread to thread to make that clear, and this is a thing two years in duration. I find D. Scarlatti's obession with me very uncomfortable, yet if it's me.......it's untrue, or it's not a problem, or I can't possibly be right about even that much.

:shrug: What do you want me to say? Are you really clear about the facts in both cases?



You can't do anything about that. All you can do is make sure there isn't a log in your own eye. ;)

I can argue all I want. I think my arguments have been fair, and well-grounded, so I'm not sure what part of childish this is.

[yguy]

In fact, I would argue that Legs is the most guilty, if there really is any guilt on TJL's part.

Are you seriously contending that Legs is guilty for putting him on ignore?