Roll Call of Fallen Commrades

[Teddy B 17,252]

You don't?

Nope.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfHsdnm_WlE

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Nice, keep bringing up the past, rub it in.

Perhaps my perceptions of the two fellas in question are different enough that I only choose to interact with one of them... is that a problem for you?

In point of fact, I have never called you anything close to what you called me in that post. I didn't make it up. You said, and I quote:

"knob slobbering boy toy hail Hamas ming"

I don't care to be honest, but to make a public apology to one guy you insulted and leave off another not only makes you appear somewhat mean spirited but it makes the gesture of the apology seem hollow as well.

Edited August 12, 2014 by Hail Ming!

[JohnR! 5,495]

In point of fact, I have never called you anything close to what you called me in that post. I didn't make it up. You said, and I quote:

"knob slobbering boy toy hail Hamas ming"

I don't care to be honest, but to make a public apology to one guy you insulted and leave off another not only makes you appear somewhat mean spirited but it makes the gesture of the apology seem hollow as well.

Did the mods allow for such a comment to stand or did they delete the post?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

On that I agree, MBD is wrong a lot , augmentative, acidic and a bit of smart A. However at least his posts make you think and evaluate things.

The problem is that when you surround yourself with people who think like you it's easy to assume that everyone thinks in that way.

I told you once, for example, that outside of the USA Al Gore isn't seen as a major figure in the climate change debate. What I said is absolutely true, yet you weren't willing to even give the idea consideration.

So as much as you want to believe that my posts are somehow of a lower quality because you don't like the ideas expressed (or me for expressing them I guess), you shouldn't try pretend that you're more open minded than is really the case.

Did the mods allow for such a comment to stand or did they delete the post?

Apparently Harpa reported it, but it was left in the thread until Ryan turned up a couple of days later and closed it.

To answer your question the post and the thread are still there. Probably on page four of the CEHST by now.

Edited August 12, 2014 by Hail Ming!

[JohnR! 5,495]

Apparently Harpa reported it, but it was left in the thread until Ryan turned up a couple of days later and closed it.

To answer your question the post and the thread are still there. Probably on page four of the CEHST by now.

I would have reported it too, although I have to tell you that I don't even care or pay attention to insults paid to my face, so I really couldn't care less for what a stranger in cyberspace has to say about me.

However, the TOS are there for a reason and nobody should be able to use those words towards others.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I would have reported it too, although I have to tell you that I don't even care or pay attention to insults paid to my face, so I really couldn't care less for what a stranger in cyberspace has to say about me.

However, the TOS are there for a reason and nobody should be able to use those words towards others.

I don't either really, it's all part of the game. People love to assume the emotional states of others from behind a computer screen. It's an assumption that is easily manipulated.

I just think it's funny to go to the effort of making a public apology but then sidestep comments made to another poster (in the same post no less) because he personally dislikes me. You'd have to, to say what he said.

You see, I bet he won't say anything to me, let alone any attempt at apology. You see he knows that I know that I am on his ignore list and breaking that means that I win.

I'm not sure what I win mind you, only that it's important enough for it not to be allowed to happen ;-)

That's the last I'll say about it anyway. I'll leave it up to Dave's conscience to do the right thing.

Edited August 12, 2014 by Hail Ming!

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

I guess I'm mixing the two terms together. Several of us complained when Penny and Danno got canned, but that wasn't whining. Complaining about pissing in Cheerios was a better example of whining.

spooks, I still fail to see why you are focusing on the "pissing in Cheerios" aspect of that debacle, which wasn't what was offensive about the sentiment. The aspect that was offensive (from my recollection) was that the women in this forum were behaving like little, uptight b!tches. The pissing in Cheerios aspect was secondary. Nobody gave even a single sh!t about the Cheerios aspect of it, despite what you and others seem to think. The sentiment was that the forum was full of women who were preventing men from acting like men, and we should just sling our hook and GTFO because hey, who wants to listen to a goddamn woman?

I was offended, and you know I'm no prude.

[DavenRoxy 1,073]

In point of fact, I have never called you anything close to what you called me in that post. I didn't make it up. You said, and I quote:

"knob slobbering boy toy hail Hamas ming"

I don't care to be honest, but to make a public apology to one guy you insulted and leave off another not only makes you appear somewhat mean spirited but it makes the gesture of the apology seem hollow as well.

Well, since you don't want to let it go, I'll explain so that you understand better.

the knob slobbering boy toy part referred to your almost daily penchant for chiming in on many of MBDs posts, rarely with anything substantive, and often just mocking or otherwise denigrating others on VJ. The Hamas part was because in another thread, you seemed to be supportive of their actions against Israel.

I apologized to MBD because even though he says inflammatory things at times, even though he has been known to toss out the insults when people don't agree with him, and even though he seems to hold my country in low regard... he is very good at presenting facts. In short, I have learned from him and his abrasive attitude in the time that I have been here. And I have been around the world enough to know that in person, he is probably not the same as he appears here, most likely more tolerable. Most are, I think.

I did not apologize to you because I didn't really remember that part of my rant, it was secondary to my attack on MBD. I don't like the way you suck up to him, and for the way that you insult others on here, often with little value added to a topic. But if that's your style, so be it, I have no more right to ask you to be civil than I have to ask you to pull up your pants I reckon. You are slightly more credible (in my opinion) than TheTruth was. That's why I chose to block you a while after I did her. Which I now know is a waste of time, since I see half or more of what is posted due to quotes. So I will unblock you, and hope I can find more logic and less hatefulness in your posts. To your credit, it seems you may have been doing less of that lately, but it's hard to say, because I don't see everything you post.

I will apologize for the "knob slobbering" part of my comments to you, that was uncalled for. The part where you jump on MBDs bandwagon all the time like you feel a need to praise him, that sticks, cuz that's the way I see it. "Boy toy" is the wrong term, I think "biggest fan" may be the more PC way to say it.

And if you tell me that you are not a supporter of Hamas, I will add an apology for saying that. Just seemed to be your leaning in another thread, and I was particularly tired of hearing people support a group of people who hide behind civilians (not only here, but other sources too), and I took that out on you. If you DO support the terrorist activities of Hamas, then stick it.

[decocker 7,198]

rule number one of life/vj: never question the actions of israel.

[GandD 5,966]

I don't get it.

[DavenRoxy 1,073]

I just think it's funny to go to the effort of making a public apology but then sidestep comments made to another poster (in the same post no less) because he personally dislikes me. You'd have to, to say what he said.

You see, I bet he won't say anything to me, let alone any attempt at apology. You see he knows that I know that I am on his ignore list and breaking that means that I win.

Ok, you win. You're off my coveted ignore list. I didn't sidestep you, I didn't see you. Teddy brought it to my attention, actually. Damm him for his humanity.

For your persistence, you win one free week of VJ balderdash-ery. Enjoy your time!

I don't get it.

I'm sorry to hear that. If you want, I can talk to D about that for you.

[GandD 5,966]

I'm sorry to hear that. If you want, I can talk to D about that for you.

Naw, she's too uppity to do the deed when I'm having a heavy flow.

[decocker 7,198]

omg.

[spookyturtle 9,466]

spooks, I still fail to see why you are focusing on the "pissing in Cheerios" aspect of that debacle, which wasn't what was offensive about the sentiment. The aspect that was offensive (from my recollection) was that the women in this forum were behaving like little, uptight b!tches. The pissing in Cheerios aspect was secondary. Nobody gave even a single sh!t about the Cheerios aspect of it, despite what you and others seem to think. The sentiment was that the forum was full of women who were preventing men from acting like men, and we should just sling our hook and GTFO because hey, who wants to listen to a goddamn woman?

I was offended, and you know I'm no prude.

The original Cheerios comment was made about the Truth to imply that she had gotten up on the wrong side of the bed, was in a bad mood etc. Some took it as knock on all women here. The b!tches comment was fabricated by a female user here after the fact. I still have the email with the original post which I offered to post way back when this bs started, but I was advised not to by moderation.

This same female user and I were discussing something in one of the gun or shooting threads a couple of weeks ago. It was something about using force or not, and I asked would you run away if you walked in on someone assaulting one of your family members or would you take action. The comment I got was, " we were having a decent discussion and you have to throw in a snide remark about me not caring about my family". I have no idea how anyone could have gotten that from what I posted. I apologized, saying there was no intent of offending you and that is clearly not what I implied. Naturally, there was no response to that post. Same situation as the Cheerios BS. Either over reaction about nothing, or intentionally stirring the pot. Take your pick.

The OP of the original comment wasn't even permitted by moderation to explain his comment. He merely stated that The Truth was a grumpy poster. The rest of you turned it into the all females are b!tches nonsense. If he said your a crabby grouch it would have meant the same thing and I'd bet that no drama would have followed. The comment was directed at one user, and with good reason for the comments in question, but that part is conveniently ignored.

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

Thank you for the context. If that's the case, and no greater animus was expressed towards us collectively, then it's been blown out of proportion. I remember it differently, but perhaps incorrectly. Thanks.