S
Sir Speedy
Guest
It's been stated, from non-credible sources, that the kid who claimed molestation at the hands of MJ was lying.
Still, non-credible sources...
Still, non-credible sources...
-
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
S
shtove
Guest
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (C A Iversen @ Jun 29 2009, 10:04 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
I didn't make that image, but I used it and think it's funny. So, yes - I am one of those assholes.
Surprised that someone who reads books is so prissy.
When you wrote the word "odd" I misread it as "good". Same thing in my view.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (C A Iversen @ Jun 29 2009, 10:04 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
The dehumanisation point is perverted - the one reason this man got so much attention is because he was a celeb, a cartoon presentation. I've taken the **** out of him because he was a sad drug addict and insanely indebted - an even greater addiction. Those are his real public attributes.
My overall take on your post is that, seeing as you're not religious, you must be a card carrying member of the communist party and a general hater of humanity.
[/b][/quote]
I didn't make that image, but I used it and think it's funny. So, yes - I am one of those assholes.
Surprised that someone who reads books is so prissy.
When you wrote the word "odd" I misread it as "good". Same thing in my view.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (C A Iversen @ Jun 29 2009, 10:04 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
You can choose not to read it. Freedom of choice, plain and simple.Glad you agree that there's some really poor form around from people, Laetca. I also have pondered it a bit and I realise something. These "people" seem to realise quite clearly that they may cause a reaction with their comments, but make them anyway. Seeing that they are annoying people seems to actually push them to post this kind of thing even more, because they like to know that they've caused people to feel bad.
The usual security blanket which gives them license to offend even more is that they tend to see it has having the right to. Freedom of expression is often used as a tool to knowingly cause others discomfort. Then there's the things that they can say about those who stand up to them, "Grow a thick skin", "Get over it", "It's not like this affected you personally"etc. The obvious intellectual defence is make it seem as though we are the problem, even though we didn't initiate the behaviour.
The most common of all defences (and the most sickening) is the dehumanisation of the subject, most commonly pointing out the errors made in their life as if to deny any good acts at all. In so doing, they attempt to achieve the aim of "justification". This justification is usually backed up by other like-minded individuals and then enables the next layer of security by providing themselves the defence of a receptive audience.
The intent doesn't seem to be to explore their right to expression, as the people who take part in this kind of behaviour rarely display something original in composition. The intent is to greedily indulge in the fullest extent of their liberties and in doing so make sure that they've denied others an enjoyable experience.
The awareness seems to certainly be there that the birth of a new life and the death of an older one are perhaps the most seriously important moments in any indiviudals existence, but their own liberties are always placed in front of this.
This behaviour is largely taken past it's logical extreme in one forum more than any other, the internet. Thats the final security blanket.
My own perspective (having lived a less than fully righteous life myself) is that I'm not a religious person, but a certain phrase seems apt, "Judge not lest ye be judged yourself". Which to me certainly seems to endorse and acknowledge the way in which "karma" or "luck" seems to intervene in our lives. We nearly all experience it. Do something wrong and then later on something goes wrong for you. It seems to balance out and is fair in nearly every way. Except one. Sometimes it seems to not come back on some people regularly, but comes back later on in much larger concentrations. Like a lump sum if you will.
Good luck, Shtove.
The dehumanisation point is perverted - the one reason this man got so much attention is because he was a celeb, a cartoon presentation. I've taken the **** out of him because he was a sad drug addict and insanely indebted - an even greater addiction. Those are his real public attributes.
My overall take on your post is that, seeing as you're not religious, you must be a card carrying member of the communist party and a general hater of humanity.
C
C A Iversen
Guest
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (shtove @ Jun 29 2009, 11:33 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
I didn't make that image, but I used it and think it's funny. So, yes - I am one of those assholes.
Surprised that someone who reads books is so prissy.
When you wrote the word "odd" I misread it as "good". Same thing in my view.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (C A Iversen @ Jun 29 2009, 10:04 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
The dehumanisation point is perverted - the one reason this man got so much attention is because he was a celeb, a cartoon presentation. I've taken the **** out of him because he was a sad drug addict and insanely indebted - an even greater addiction. Those are his real public attributes.
My overall take on your post is that, seeing as you're not religious, you must be a card carrying member of the communist party and a general hater of humanity.
[/b][/quote]
Guess we just disagree again. No sense having dialogue with you then. Good luck to ya.
[/b][/quote]
I didn't make that image, but I used it and think it's funny. So, yes - I am one of those assholes.
Surprised that someone who reads books is so prissy.
When you wrote the word "odd" I misread it as "good". Same thing in my view.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (C A Iversen @ Jun 29 2009, 10:04 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
You can choose not to read it. Freedom of choice, plain and simple.Glad you agree that there's some really poor form around from people, Laetca. I also have pondered it a bit and I realise something. These "people" seem to realise quite clearly that they may cause a reaction with their comments, but make them anyway. Seeing that they are annoying people seems to actually push them to post this kind of thing even more, because they like to know that they've caused people to feel bad.
The usual security blanket which gives them license to offend even more is that they tend to see it has having the right to. Freedom of expression is often used as a tool to knowingly cause others discomfort. Then there's the things that they can say about those who stand up to them, "Grow a thick skin", "Get over it", "It's not like this affected you personally"etc. The obvious intellectual defence is make it seem as though we are the problem, even though we didn't initiate the behaviour.
The most common of all defences (and the most sickening) is the dehumanisation of the subject, most commonly pointing out the errors made in their life as if to deny any good acts at all. In so doing, they attempt to achieve the aim of "justification". This justification is usually backed up by other like-minded individuals and then enables the next layer of security by providing themselves the defence of a receptive audience.
The intent doesn't seem to be to explore their right to expression, as the people who take part in this kind of behaviour rarely display something original in composition. The intent is to greedily indulge in the fullest extent of their liberties and in doing so make sure that they've denied others an enjoyable experience.
The awareness seems to certainly be there that the birth of a new life and the death of an older one are perhaps the most seriously important moments in any indiviudals existence, but their own liberties are always placed in front of this.
This behaviour is largely taken past it's logical extreme in one forum more than any other, the internet. Thats the final security blanket.
My own perspective (having lived a less than fully righteous life myself) is that I'm not a religious person, but a certain phrase seems apt, "Judge not lest ye be judged yourself". Which to me certainly seems to endorse and acknowledge the way in which "karma" or "luck" seems to intervene in our lives. We nearly all experience it. Do something wrong and then later on something goes wrong for you. It seems to balance out and is fair in nearly every way. Except one. Sometimes it seems to not come back on some people regularly, but comes back later on in much larger concentrations. Like a lump sum if you will.
Good luck, Shtove.
The dehumanisation point is perverted - the one reason this man got so much attention is because he was a celeb, a cartoon presentation. I've taken the **** out of him because he was a sad drug addict and insanely indebted - an even greater addiction. Those are his real public attributes.
My overall take on your post is that, seeing as you're not religious, you must be a card carrying member of the communist party and a general hater of humanity.
[/b][/quote]
Guess we just disagree again. No sense having dialogue with you then. Good luck to ya.
K
kaftka
Guest
Wait... Are you guys talking about the death certificate image? How is that in bad taste? Granted, it's not VERY funny, but I raised at least one corner of my mouth.
If you're talking about a different image then forget what I just said.
What's wrong with making jokes about death? Sick jokes are bad of course, but there's nothing wrong with a bit of wit at emotional and sad times.
My grandmother died acouple of weeks ago. I was quite close to her (why couldn't it have been my mum that went!!!?) but as a coping mechanism, my family cracked wise over and over. Right up until she was thrown into the furnace. I'd like to think she would have found the funny side of at least half of our jokes (the other half she would have sniggered at also, if she wasn't so riddled with dementia).
Now, I've met Michael, and he was a lovely man. Had a glorious sense of humour. He would have found the death certificate gag hilarious. He would never have found child molestation jokes funny, of course. However, those sort of jokes were around long before he died and not many people went up in arms about those. The people that dodn't find them funny (myself included) sort of smiled politely and said "oh yes, very good" or "mmhmm", So what's the big deal with jokes once someone dies?
I'm sure nobody who knew Michael will read this page, and indeed anyone who makes a joke about his death will certainly not say it to any of his friends or family, so why does it offend people on here?
If you're talking about a different image then forget what I just said.
What's wrong with making jokes about death? Sick jokes are bad of course, but there's nothing wrong with a bit of wit at emotional and sad times.
My grandmother died acouple of weeks ago. I was quite close to her (why couldn't it have been my mum that went!!!?) but as a coping mechanism, my family cracked wise over and over. Right up until she was thrown into the furnace. I'd like to think she would have found the funny side of at least half of our jokes (the other half she would have sniggered at also, if she wasn't so riddled with dementia).
Now, I've met Michael, and he was a lovely man. Had a glorious sense of humour. He would have found the death certificate gag hilarious. He would never have found child molestation jokes funny, of course. However, those sort of jokes were around long before he died and not many people went up in arms about those. The people that dodn't find them funny (myself included) sort of smiled politely and said "oh yes, very good" or "mmhmm", So what's the big deal with jokes once someone dies?
I'm sure nobody who knew Michael will read this page, and indeed anyone who makes a joke about his death will certainly not say it to any of his friends or family, so why does it offend people on here?
C
C A Iversen
Guest
Not really talking about the death certificate image or even really joking about death in general. It's about the kind of humour (which IS out there) that basically says "This guy is a piece of filth, lets dance on his grave and spit on his corpse". Please don't tell me that there isn't a thread of that running through some of the jokes.
People who make a standard death joke for humours sake, but didn't hate the guy aren't so bad. It's the one's who are basically going on and on with multiple sick jokes or sitting in judgement of his life as though they themselves have lived perfectly that make me sick.
People who make a standard death joke for humours sake, but didn't hate the guy aren't so bad. It's the one's who are basically going on and on with multiple sick jokes or sitting in judgement of his life as though they themselves have lived perfectly that make me sick.
L
Laetca
Guest
Not sure what reading books has to do with being prissy. You're a selfdeclared asshole and you seem to be proud of it, so I remain the right to be prissy.
I know there were bad jokes around long before the man died (and I fully agree that the death certificate joke wasn't all that bad, just lame,) what bothers me most is that dead people can't defend themselves in any way. Not that he did during his lifetime but still, it's the thought that counts.
I know there were bad jokes around long before the man died (and I fully agree that the death certificate joke wasn't all that bad, just lame,) what bothers me most is that dead people can't defend themselves in any way. Not that he did during his lifetime but still, it's the thought that counts.
A
alexrugby
Guest
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Laetca @ Jun 29 2009, 10:46 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
Does this discussion have any meaning?
Different people have different mind
Does this discussion have any meaning?
Different people have different mind
S
shtove
Guest
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Laetca @ Jun 29 2009, 06:46 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
You take the time to read good books - not many do - so surely you're inclined to laugh at hero-worship.
p.s. Why not proclaim yourself an asshole? Humility is good for the soul. It's what St Michael would do ...
The opposite.
You take the time to read good books - not many do - so surely you're inclined to laugh at hero-worship.
p.s. Why not proclaim yourself an asshole? Humility is good for the soul. It's what St Michael would do ...
A
alexrugby
Guest
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (shtove @ Jul 1 2009, 01:15 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
You take the time to read good books - not many do - so surely you're inclined to laugh at hero-worship.
p.s. Why not proclaim yourself an asshole? Humility is good for the soul. It's what St Michael would do ...
[/b][/quote]
Shtooooooooooove ahahahahahahhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
C'mon man you trample Jacko under feet
The opposite.
You take the time to read good books - not many do - so surely you're inclined to laugh at hero-worship.
p.s. Why not proclaim yourself an asshole? Humility is good for the soul. It's what St Michael would do ...
[/b][/quote]
Shtooooooooooove ahahahahahahhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
C'mon man you trample Jacko under feet
C
C A Iversen
Guest
One of what I imagine will be a few sad attention grabs
It was only a matter of time that some attention seeker, started pointing the finger at everyone else as though he has the moral right at his back.
I know some of you will really enjoy this, I only like the aspect of how it targets the media.
It was only a matter of time that some attention seeker, started pointing the finger at everyone else as though he has the moral right at his back.
I know some of you will really enjoy this, I only like the aspect of how it targets the media.
S
SaintsFan_Schweinsteiger_Webby
Guest
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (C A Iversen @ Jul 1 2009, 05:13 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
Not the greatest example of satire, but does have it's amusing side nonetheless.
Considering your views on other people though, the comment about "moral right" is quite amusing. You slate others for making jokes about death by taking the view that you have..."the moral right at his (your) back."
I don't really see what all the fuss is about, or why anyone who didn't respect him in life should suddenly start doing so in death. I quite like some of his songs but that doesn't mean that now he's dead I'm going to suddenly forget all the controversy surrounding him. Aquitted in court or not, surely no one can deny there is something very wrong with a grown men hosting sleepovers for children. And just because he's now passed I think it would be hypocritical of anyone/everyone who took a dim view of his actions during life to suddenly turn round and pretend he was a god-like figure as opposed to a very troubled and on occassion suspicious individual.
Not the greatest example of satire, but does have it's amusing side nonetheless.
Considering your views on other people though, the comment about "moral right" is quite amusing. You slate others for making jokes about death by taking the view that you have..."the moral right at his (your) back."
I don't really see what all the fuss is about, or why anyone who didn't respect him in life should suddenly start doing so in death. I quite like some of his songs but that doesn't mean that now he's dead I'm going to suddenly forget all the controversy surrounding him. Aquitted in court or not, surely no one can deny there is something very wrong with a grown men hosting sleepovers for children. And just because he's now passed I think it would be hypocritical of anyone/everyone who took a dim view of his actions during life to suddenly turn round and pretend he was a god-like figure as opposed to a very troubled and on occassion suspicious individual.
C
C A Iversen
Guest
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SaintsFan_Schweinsteiger_Webby @ Jul 1 2009, 08:32 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
Not the greatest example of satire, but does have it's amusing side nonetheless.
Considering your views on other people though, the comment about "moral right" is quite amusing. You slate others for making jokes about death by taking the view that you have..."the moral right at his (your) back."
I don't really see what all the fuss is about, or why anyone who didn't respect him in life should suddenly start doing so in death. I quite like some of his songs but that doesn't mean that now he's dead I'm going to suddenly forget all the controversy surrounding him. Aquitted in court or not, surely no one can deny there is something very wrong with a grown men hosting sleepovers for children. And just because he's now passed I think it would be hypocritical of anyone/everyone who took a dim view of his actions during life to suddenly turn round and pretend he was a god-like figure as opposed to a very troubled and on occassion suspicious individual.
[/b][/quote]
I don't take the view I have the moral right at my back. I was just saying the song sounded like the guy thought he had it. I have no idea, none at all if there is a correct standpoint to take on Jackson. I just strongly don't like people who like to bully people they don't know, celebrities or otherwise. With some of the stuff I've done in my life I'm not saying I've got any moral high-ground, so your imagining thats what I said. You've always liked to twist my words for some very sad reason.
I find it offensive to have it suggested that I think I'm righteous. I put across how I feel other people act, but I'm never so sure as to say that I'm always right. I've been wrong a lot in my life mate, done some wrong things and made some wrong moves, but there's always been someone like you there to judge me, so thats about the only parallel to what Jacksons family are going through.
By the way, interesting fact. First time we've crossed words for months and months on here and guess who started it this time?
Not the greatest example of satire, but does have it's amusing side nonetheless.
Considering your views on other people though, the comment about "moral right" is quite amusing. You slate others for making jokes about death by taking the view that you have..."the moral right at his (your) back."
I don't really see what all the fuss is about, or why anyone who didn't respect him in life should suddenly start doing so in death. I quite like some of his songs but that doesn't mean that now he's dead I'm going to suddenly forget all the controversy surrounding him. Aquitted in court or not, surely no one can deny there is something very wrong with a grown men hosting sleepovers for children. And just because he's now passed I think it would be hypocritical of anyone/everyone who took a dim view of his actions during life to suddenly turn round and pretend he was a god-like figure as opposed to a very troubled and on occassion suspicious individual.
[/b][/quote]
I don't take the view I have the moral right at my back. I was just saying the song sounded like the guy thought he had it. I have no idea, none at all if there is a correct standpoint to take on Jackson. I just strongly don't like people who like to bully people they don't know, celebrities or otherwise. With some of the stuff I've done in my life I'm not saying I've got any moral high-ground, so your imagining thats what I said. You've always liked to twist my words for some very sad reason.
I find it offensive to have it suggested that I think I'm righteous. I put across how I feel other people act, but I'm never so sure as to say that I'm always right. I've been wrong a lot in my life mate, done some wrong things and made some wrong moves, but there's always been someone like you there to judge me, so thats about the only parallel to what Jacksons family are going through.
By the way, interesting fact. First time we've crossed words for months and months on here and guess who started it this time?
S
SaintsFan_Schweinsteiger_Webby
Guest
I think your post is most effective with a lone violinist playing a solemn lament in the background.
I "started it" because I disagree with you. Just out of interest, please provide a brief summary of what "someone like you", i.e. me, is exactly.
I don't need to twist anyone's words despite accusations. Every single person on the planet will "judge" other people every single day of their life. We "judge" rugby players based on their on and off field performances. You "judge" the person who made the video, likening him and others on TRF to "attention seekers". I "judge" a waiter who serves me a meal. It's part of everyday life, we all do it so don't try and make out like I'm doing something unusual or wrong.
See? Not one word twisted so far.
Stop playing the self-pitying card for once and just enjoy the debate. People are allowed to have opinions contrary to yours, that's the whole point of a discussion forum. Believe it or not I don't hunt your every word looking for my moment to pounce, I just didn't agree with some of the views being expressed surrounding Wacko Jacko is this thread. That includes yours.
Address my points as a discussion rather than choosing to focus on some off kilter idea that I'm picking on you.
I "started it" because I disagree with you. Just out of interest, please provide a brief summary of what "someone like you", i.e. me, is exactly.
I don't need to twist anyone's words despite accusations. Every single person on the planet will "judge" other people every single day of their life. We "judge" rugby players based on their on and off field performances. You "judge" the person who made the video, likening him and others on TRF to "attention seekers". I "judge" a waiter who serves me a meal. It's part of everyday life, we all do it so don't try and make out like I'm doing something unusual or wrong.
See? Not one word twisted so far.
Stop playing the self-pitying card for once and just enjoy the debate. People are allowed to have opinions contrary to yours, that's the whole point of a discussion forum. Believe it or not I don't hunt your every word looking for my moment to pounce, I just didn't agree with some of the views being expressed surrounding Wacko Jacko is this thread. That includes yours.
Address my points as a discussion rather than choosing to focus on some off kilter idea that I'm picking on you.
W
Woldog
Guest
Can I just point out that the media made fun of him for 15 years, and now that he has finally shuffled off he's the king of pop again, mob of hypocrites....
Q
QLD
Guest
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SaintsFan_Schweinsteiger_Webby @ Jul 1 2009, 07:13 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
But.. But.. everyones attention seeking whores.
But.. But.. everyones attention seeking whores.
C
C A Iversen
Guest
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SaintsFan_Schweinsteiger_Webby @ Jul 1 2009, 09:13 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
Ok, if the point of this forum is to say things in ways that please yourself with no regard to how others feel about them, then I guess I can make this one place where I can let myself off the hook and really say what I want then.
I'm not pitying myself, as you again label me. I just didn't realise that judging people without tact was the way to go, you've steered me right on that.
As for addressing your points as a discussion rather than choosin... blah blah blah? No, I won't. I'll address whatever I want, how I want, from now on, as thats how it goes apparently.
So, here goes. I'm not a guy with a lot of time to argue with you, I find you completely different to me and the kind of guy who'd never agree with me on 90% of the things I say, so it'd be a waste of time to converse with you in any way.
So whenever you argue anything I say on the forum, I'm probably going to be annoyed, because I could care less about responding to your posts on half the crap you say and generally choose not to. I try to ignore your posts, for sake of this stuff not happening.
So, it's not a "win" when I choose not to respond to you, or say something back out of being ****** off. I just already know your a guy who'd never change his opinion on anything I say, so I'm not going to waste by breath from here on. It's obvious that you have no regard for me or my opinions and the feeling's mutual, so that's always going to be a stalemate.
So, in short good luck to you Webby, we're just polar opposites I guess.
Ok, if the point of this forum is to say things in ways that please yourself with no regard to how others feel about them, then I guess I can make this one place where I can let myself off the hook and really say what I want then.
I'm not pitying myself, as you again label me. I just didn't realise that judging people without tact was the way to go, you've steered me right on that.
As for addressing your points as a discussion rather than choosin... blah blah blah? No, I won't. I'll address whatever I want, how I want, from now on, as thats how it goes apparently.
So, here goes. I'm not a guy with a lot of time to argue with you, I find you completely different to me and the kind of guy who'd never agree with me on 90% of the things I say, so it'd be a waste of time to converse with you in any way.
So whenever you argue anything I say on the forum, I'm probably going to be annoyed, because I could care less about responding to your posts on half the crap you say and generally choose not to. I try to ignore your posts, for sake of this stuff not happening.
So, it's not a "win" when I choose not to respond to you, or say something back out of being ****** off. I just already know your a guy who'd never change his opinion on anything I say, so I'm not going to waste by breath from here on. It's obvious that you have no regard for me or my opinions and the feeling's mutual, so that's always going to be a stalemate.
So, in short good luck to you Webby, we're just polar opposites I guess.
S
SaintsFan_Schweinsteiger_Webby
Guest
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (C A Iversen @ Jul 1 2009, 11:49 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
Ok, if the point of this forum is to say things in ways that please yourself with no regard to how others feel about them, then I guess I can make this one place where I can let myself off the hook and really say what I want then.
I'm not pitying myself, as you again label me. I just didn't realise that judging people without tact was the way to go, you've steered me right on that.
As for addressing your points as a discussion rather than choosin... blah blah blah? No, I won't. I'll address whatever I want, how I want, from now on, as thats how it goes apparently.
So, here goes. I'm not a guy with a lot of time to argue with you, I find you completely different to me and the kind of guy who'd never agree with me on 90% of the things I say, so it'd be a waste of time to converse with you in any way.
So whenever you argue anything I say on the forum, I'm probably going to be annoyed, because I could care less about responding to your posts on half the crap you say and generally choose not to. I try to ignore your posts, for sake of this stuff not happening.
So, it's not a "win" when I choose not to respond to you, or say something back out of being ****** off. I just already know your a guy who'd never change his opinion on anything I say, so I'm not going to waste by breath from here on. It's obvious that you have no regard for me or my opinions and the feeling's mutual, so that's always going to be a stalemate.
So, in short good luck to you Webby, we're just polar opposites I guess.
[/b][/quote]
Fair enough.
I'd much rather we agreed that we're very different people, it means we can both discuss topics (in a heated manner if we so wish) without having to worry.
Ok, if the point of this forum is to say things in ways that please yourself with no regard to how others feel about them, then I guess I can make this one place where I can let myself off the hook and really say what I want then.
I'm not pitying myself, as you again label me. I just didn't realise that judging people without tact was the way to go, you've steered me right on that.
As for addressing your points as a discussion rather than choosin... blah blah blah? No, I won't. I'll address whatever I want, how I want, from now on, as thats how it goes apparently.
So, here goes. I'm not a guy with a lot of time to argue with you, I find you completely different to me and the kind of guy who'd never agree with me on 90% of the things I say, so it'd be a waste of time to converse with you in any way.
So whenever you argue anything I say on the forum, I'm probably going to be annoyed, because I could care less about responding to your posts on half the crap you say and generally choose not to. I try to ignore your posts, for sake of this stuff not happening.
So, it's not a "win" when I choose not to respond to you, or say something back out of being ****** off. I just already know your a guy who'd never change his opinion on anything I say, so I'm not going to waste by breath from here on. It's obvious that you have no regard for me or my opinions and the feeling's mutual, so that's always going to be a stalemate.
So, in short good luck to you Webby, we're just polar opposites I guess.
[/b][/quote]
Fair enough.
I'd much rather we agreed that we're very different people, it means we can both discuss topics (in a heated manner if we so wish) without having to worry.
S
shtove
Guest
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (C A Iversen @ Jul 1 2009, 10:49 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
How could you? I thought we had something.
p.s. You'll love this ...
... actually, I couldn't be bothered googling. Fish in a barrel.
But you said that to me as well, Iversen.
How could you? I thought we had something.
p.s. You'll love this ...
... actually, I couldn't be bothered googling. Fish in a barrel.
C
C A Iversen
Guest
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (shtove @ Jul 2 2009, 08:19 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
How could you? I thought we had something.
p.s. You'll love this ...
... actually, I couldn't be bothered googling. Fish in a barrel.
[/b][/quote]
I'm not attacking Webby with the following, just explaining something.
Shtove, we do have something compared to the Webby scenario. So does Logohhrea and Teh Mite too. Your opinions drive me crazy at times, but I don't sense any kind of feeling that wouldn't go away if we somehow met in person. I'm not saying I'm right or he is, just that he and I are not good for each other.
So, I guess I still love your irish corpse. I mean skeleton avatar.
But you said that to me as well, Iversen.
How could you? I thought we had something.
p.s. You'll love this ...
... actually, I couldn't be bothered googling. Fish in a barrel.
[/b][/quote]
I'm not attacking Webby with the following, just explaining something.
Shtove, we do have something compared to the Webby scenario. So does Logohhrea and Teh Mite too. Your opinions drive me crazy at times, but I don't sense any kind of feeling that wouldn't go away if we somehow met in person. I'm not saying I'm right or he is, just that he and I are not good for each other.
So, I guess I still love your irish corpse. I mean skeleton avatar.
K
kaftka
Guest
Do we have something CA? Please don't tell me I'm imagining it.
