What is Lance... This is personal

[UCE]

But ya still stuck around to tell about it. So why not just say it? Duh.

When does your contract run out? I think we're all looking forward to the day we can live without the hired flamer.

PBW

So often it appears that anyone who disagrees with another person's opinion is suddenly a henious evil person, and they get accused of general crimes like that of a "hired flamer."

Why? So an opinion differs from yours. Why does that make the disagreer a flamer, let alone a hired one?

These aren't rhetorcial questions. If there is an actual reason for this rather than saying "I disagree that Lance is a misogynist," I'd like to hear it.

Unda. Cruica. Eximius.

 

[P. B. Walker]

So often it appears that anyone who disagrees with another person's opinion is suddenly a henious evil person, and they get accused of general crimes like that of a "hired flamer."

Why? So an opinion differs from yours. Why does that make the disagreer a flamer, let alone a hired one?

These aren't rhetorcial questions. If there is an actual reason for this rather than saying "I disagree that Lance is a misogynist," I'd like to hear it.

Unda. Cruica. Eximius.

You are actually really out of the loop on this one UCE, not to mention out of context. This thread was started in Sept. during the bitter battle between Lance and whats-her-face. In their effort to put Lance down they got some of the more popular flamers from the GB to come over and start slamming Lance. Lav was one of those flamers. She was never her to discuss BDSM or anything else. Her only role was to slam Lance.

So sorry.. no I don't think everybody that disagrees with me is a troll... otherwise I'd call you one because there have been several issue that we did not agree on. And yet, I haven't called you one yet, have I?

Also, this quote of mine was talking about something Lav said, which she has editted out. She was saying she wasn't going to tell a joke about Lance.

Anyhoos... not sure what you point was UCE other than to call me a dumbass.. but whatever.

PBW

 

[UCE]

You are too defensive, PBW. I was asking questions about a post of your that was baffling to me, not calling you a dumbass.

I wasn't here in Sept to see this clash you speak of below and I can't be expected to know all this history--therefore how can you take my remarks as trying to make you look bad...unless of course you thought I WAS here in Sept (which I suppose is reasonable; I think I started posting in Oct--may have been a stray post in sept, but I wasn't reading anything in any depth at that time) and talking from a position knowing all about this business.

I believe I joined the forum just after everything about that was finished because for awhile I kept seeing oblique references to it, none of which described what had happened in detail. At any rate, I was rather happy that I had managed to miss such a huge flamewar and I did not seek out further knowledge of it.

I just thought your remark to Lavender was unfair. Whatever a person's history on a board or how tangled up it is in other issues, I can clearly see, from having used to have read some of Lance's messages, how a woman, any woman, might want to tell a misogynistic joke about him. The man makes a lot of enemies with his big mouth and his "strike below the belt" methods of fighting, that I doubt you can deny, even if he's a friend of yours. How do you know he hadn't laid a heavy sexist trip on this Lavender woman on some forum or thread which you never saw or participated in and which caused her to really dislike him, so much so that she not only was eager to join battle in Sept. but also felt a strong emotional need to bash him much later in December?

I think you are defending a friend, and that's cool, people are allowed, but I honestly didn't understand why you were defending them in that way. Now I do. But seriously, when I say I mean a question honestly, I simply mean it honestly. I want to know, not to gain a point against you. Fuck, despite the people you are friends with (Freya I am NOT referring to you! Just want to keep that straight, lol), I kind of like you. You are realtively more even-headed than many posters here.

Unda

You are actually really out of the loop on this one UCE, not to mention out of context. This thread was started in Sept. during the bitter battle between Lance and whats-her-face. In their effort to put Lance down they got some of the more popular flamers from the GB to come over and start slamming Lance. Lav was one of those flamers. She was never her to discuss BDSM or anything else. Her only role was to slam Lance.

So sorry.. no I don't think everybody that disagrees with me is a troll... otherwise I'd call you one because there have been several issue that we did not agree on. And yet, I haven't called you one yet, have I?

Also, this quote of mine was talking about something Lav said, which she has editted out. She was saying she wasn't going to tell a joke about Lance.

Anyhoos... not sure what you point was UCE other than to call me a dumbass.. but whatever.

PBW

 

[A Desert Rose]

Quite a few people could learn a great deal from Freya.

 

[Freya]

Lesson #1: How NOT to avoid drama on a regular basis.
Lesson #2: How to post a lot and say very little.


ADR

 

[P. B. Walker]

You are too defensive, PBW. I was asking questions about a post of your that was baffling to me, not calling you a dumbass.

...blah, blah, blah


Unda

Unda, it was clear that you didn't have a frickin clue and yet you felt you had to comment on it. Was it because it was a slightly pro-Lance statement? Do you think Lance and I are friends? (I'm sure you won't know this) I clearly stated throughout that little skirmish between Lance and Cym that I didn't side with either of them. Several people (to this day) will disagree with that. Whatever. Doesn't matter to me. So, if you are implying that I'm a big supporter of Lance or one of his butt buddies, you are obviously not paying attention. I respect Lance just like any other poster here. We are meer aquaintences here. Have we ever exchanged a PM? Not that I remember. If we did, it could not have been more than one or two.

You also didn't really read my statements, or didn't comprehend them very well. I wasn't complaining about Lav personally, I was complaining about the fact that "professional flamers" (as I call them) were being brought in to keep the shit storm going just because (IMHO) Lance was bitch slapping the living fuck out of them on a daily basis. I did not like that tactic one frickin bit. And yes, Lav was one of them. If she's going to step into those shoes, she better be prepared to receive the shit storm. JMHO.

So if you were so frickin baffled, you should have asked a question, instead of appearing like a clueless numbskull and saying that I call everyone that disagrees with me a flamer. And sorry, I don't track when and who joins this place. As if anyone is that important. I don't think Lav needs you defending her, nor did you ever hear both sides of the story, as is clear by the lack of posts from you asking for the entire picture. Instead, you snapped to a judgement based solely on the fact that I said something negative about another woman who also happens to dislike Lance.

I apologize if you think I'm being harsh and unfair with you, but I have a real problem with you judging me about anything.

PBW "I got some from-unda"

 

[Lancecastor]

Hey Lance, howya doin?

Oh, hey, good, how are you?

Fine...another meaningful thread, yes?

Yes! It's a great one!

Say did you know you're a misogynist asshole?

No, but I like Miso soup!

Cool!

Well, gotta go...

Cheers!

Lance
Lance

 

[UCE]

Mr. PBW,

Your defensiveness on this issue continues to amaze me. I think part of the problem is that you've misunderstood my motives from the start and so rarther than reading the simple straightfoward words that I originally wrote in my first short message to you as they are commonly interpreted in normal English usage, you've twisted and distorted them to mean almost the opposite of what they actually mean. The problem is, I meant them utterly and completely straigtfowardly, so your continued responses based on your personal "she REALLY meant THIS" misinterpretations are entirely inappropriate, not to mention stupid, rude, and condescending.

I am going to give one more try to explain myself in the hopes of allaying (sp?) some of your defensiveness. After reading all of the long message below, you are still incapable of grasping that I meant well and was simply asking a question so I could hear the answer, it will tell me that you are filtering every word I say through a "she's lying" lens of some sort and therefore have become more incapable than if you were deaf and blind of understanding anything I might say henceforth. If this extraordinary outcome does come to pass, believe me, I'll spare you the trouble in the future of having to address my comments to you any more. Easier done than said, that one is.

PBW said:

"Unda, it was clear that you didn't have a frickin clue and yet you felt you had to comment on it. "

Let me start out this way: when I DO have a fricking clue about something, and it's something that I believe to be stupid and harmful and repeated over and over in this forum, like a habitual pattern of dishonest abuse, then yes, I do comment on it. Which I did in the first statement of my post to you.

The comment was not specifically about you, as you could see if you re-read it as the words are commonly understood and not through any "she's replying to me so she MUST be taking a potshot at me" filter. The comment was worded generally as it was actuallhy about something I see a lot of people, not just you, doing in the forum. I made this generalization because I wanted you to understand what specifically I was looking at and why I was asking you the question (you know, the question you claim later in this post that I never asked, lol). It's just funny to me that you could miss so much that was there in my message, like my very striaghtforward question to you, and see so much that wasn't there in my message, like a comment or a critique about you.

Here is my original comment, which I used to introduce the topic I wanted to discuss about your post:

"So often it appears that anyone who disagrees with another person's opinion is suddenly a henious evil person, and they get accused of general crimes like that of a "hired flamer."
Why?"

PBW, you're claiming that I didn't have a fucking clue about what I was asking may be true in the obscure sense that I had no idea what was running through your mind--all this stuff about that old cym-lance flame war specifically--at the moment that you posted. But since when is not reading a person's mind and knowing instantly what they don't even mention in direct words (Lav's extensive history in some old flame war that this thread didn't seem to me to have anything to do with, given Lance's recent re-return) a crime?

You seem to be trying to imply here that I was talking ignorantly about a subject I had heard of (the flame war) but knew nothing about. That is a lie. I was talking about a pattern of harrassment that I have seen in this forum since I came here (most recent example before I saw your post was people calling this OO person a troll simply because they didn't like the heavy criticism being dished out) after that flamewar was long gone. This is a pattern that I do not like and which I have every right in the world to bring up in disccssion, especially since it seemed it might be germaine to this thread.. Read the words. Read my comment, quoted again, above. That was the topic of my post. A pattern of behaving which I have made myself knowledeable about through observation, not an ignorant comment about a specific historical event.

Your comment also suggests I had no business butting my nose into your comment to Lav. I beg to differ. Anything posted publically in a forum is any forum member's business, including mine. I particularly made it my business because I didn't like what I thought you might be doing. (see the quoted comment above). I thought it stunk, and I have every right to voice an opinion about what people do, and I especially will do this if it seems to stink. That's just me. Did you not like me talking about that stinky technique and asking you if you were involved in doing it? Is that your real beef with me? That I would presume you capable (even though I didn't ASSUME you capable, if I had done the latter, I would not have asked you the question that I did) of doing something nasty.

OK, right after the short comment quoted above, I posted an equally short question. Here is the question, quoted verbatim from my post:

"So an opinion differs from yours. Why does that make the disagreer a flamer, let alone a hired one?"

From this current message, PBW says:

"So if you were so frickin baffled, you should have asked a question, instead of appearing like a clueless numbskull and saying that I call everyone that disagrees with me a flamer."

Uh, if what I just quoted abive as my words (verifiable in the thread) are actually my words, what the fuck were you thinking when you wrote the above? I DID ask you the question I wanted to know the answer to. I didn't ask you OTHER questions but I had no idea they were relevant in what looked to me to be a current thread started by a current poster (the pierced knight). From my point of view, all you were doing was accusing somebody who had stopped herself from making a rude misogynistic joke about Lance, of being a "hired flamer." 1. that made no sense to me given her comment (how the hell was what she said in this thread a "hired flame?" It's something I might have said if I was bothering to pay any attention to Lance and 2. therefore I asked you about it. I simply wanted to know why.

Now, whether you are still unwilling to admit I asked you a question or not, you did answer that actual question (its in the thread record so I suggest you give up your "Unda asked no question" claim) to my full satisfaction although you didn't have to, of course and you did that splendidly, and I applaud the clarity of your answer, which provided me with information which I didn't know which is the reason WHY I FUCKING ASK QUESTIONS IN THE FIRST PLACE. To. Find. Out. That. Which. I Do. Not. Know.

What I can't applaud you for is all the defensiveness and attacking that crept into that answer and then even more into this most recent one. It's as if you feel that I had no "right" to ask such a thing. No right? Why? Am I supposed to assume you behave perfectly and rationally at all times, PBW? Good lord, I don't assume _that_ of anybody, including the people I most admire in the world. But it seems like this is your ego talking, your saying to me, "HOW DARE YOU LOWLY UNDA QUESTION GREAT ME ABOUT MY ENGAGING IN A TECNIQUE OF ARGUMENTATION EVEN IF YOU FEEL THAT TECNIQUE IS STINKY?"

PBW, I'm sorry to have to be the one to inform you of this, but you are not in no way or in any sense "above" questioning, particularly honest questioning. Your posts are not always paragons of clarity, although often they are. Nor are they paragons of "non-nastiness" although you do engage in that less than some here.

In the case of the post I responded to, in the case of the entire thread, in fact, the history that you spoke your words from was utterly non-existent, and couldn't possibly have been apparent to someone who hadn't seen or gone through that flame war and seen Lav's role in it. So, knowing nothing of any of this, even to the point of not knowing ANYTHING EXISTED I simply asked for clarification about what you were doing. But even if had had some glimmering that this was all about some old flame war, do you really thing that I dare not ask any questions about it? If you don't like a question, you simply don't have to answer it, you don't have to go all ballistic and ego-heavy with "HOW DARE YOU MENTION THIS YOU INGORANT PLEBE!" That's how you came across anyway. Anybody has the right here to write anything they want, no matter how dirty. And I personally would much rather see more people writing questions asking for clarification of things they don't understand than some of the other things they wrote. A question, particularly when one is unclear about something, is the BEST sort of post, IMO.

But there is a culture here I have noticed (going general here, PBW, this part isn't specifically about you) that tries to convince people that such questioning is always a dire insult to the person being asked, and that the evil "questioner" should be quashed for insulting the reputation of the great individual they were questioning (this is at the very core of why I have some people--not all the people I have--on ignore. They act like insane hysterics when you ask them simple questions. This response to honest, well-meant questioning always, always means that a peson has something really big and nasty to hide and you've somehow hit on some of their closet skeletons with your questions OR they have an ego as wide as ten barn doors and think they are so FAR ABOVE any questioning--but particuclarly quesitons that threaten the edifice of selfworship or the false persona they have built in this place--that anyone DARING to question THEM about ANYTHING is clearly an impudent and hostile and disreSPECTful harasser).

Back to you, PBW: I don't know how much I need to stress this point but my knowing about this situation or at least your views of this situation is going to help me (and you and others) a great deal because the next time this dead flamewar thing rears its ugly head, I will be able to comment more intelligently on it. Asking things one wants to know and getting clear answers, even answers that cover more than you asked about which is what you gave me, is always a win-win situation, IMO. The more you know about something, the better you can respond to it later.

You said:

"Was it because it was a slightly pro-Lance statement? Do you think Lance and I are friends? (I'm sure you won't know this) I clearly stated throughout that little skirmish between Lance and Cym that I didn't side with either of them. Several people (to this day) will disagree with that. Whatever. Doesn't matter to me. So, if you are implying that I'm a big supporter of Lance or one of his butt buddies, you are obviously not paying attention. I respect Lance just like any other poster here. We are meer aquaintences here. Have we ever exchanged a PM? Not that I remember. If we did, it could not have been more than one or two."

I guess I assumed you regarded Lance in friendly terms, because othewise your statement to Lav made little sense, but I wasn't really thinking about it that hard. I don't care about your presonal realtionship with him or how deep it is and I don't see why this is such an issue for you. And you don't need to answer this--it's not a question, it's your business as far as I'm concerned.

"You also didn't really read my statements, or didn't comprehend them very well. I wasn't complaining about Lav personally, I was complaining about the fact that "professional flamers" (as I call them) were being brought in to keep the shit storm going just because (IMHO) Lance was bitch slapping the living fuck out of them on a daily basis. I did not like that tactic one frickin bit. And yes, Lav was one of them. If she's going to step into those shoes, she better be prepared to receive the shit storm. JMHO. "

I did read your statements, but lacking a knowledge of ancient forum history, I interpreted them in the terms that I understood them: current terms. There was absolutely nothing explicit in what you said that pointed toward that flamewar. You used the term flamethrower but so what. I, in current events mode, just saw that as a common name someone might call somebody they were pissed at. How the hell could you expect me to interpret the words "hired flamethrower" as referrring to any specific incident, particuarly an incidient I knew almost nothing about to begin with?

And did you realize I thought that this thread was brand new? I never look at the dates on things before I respond. (I wonder how many of us do?) I also don't believe that not looking at the dates is a henious sin, although it can cause confusion later, perhaps. But someone else can just as easily KINDLY inform someone of their confusion as they can do it CRUELLY, you know what I'm saying? Just my leetle opinion here.

Oh yeah, and just in case you choose to hit me for this, there is the strong point that can be made about people who live in the certain "glass house" of not noticing when somebody joins a fourm" shouldn't "throw stones" at people who don't notice other things, like that a thread at the top of the list wasn't started yesterday!

I think maybe, although with the way you're responding (irrationally and emotionally) this is all guesswork on my part, that this is the core issue you're most annoyed at me for: you're annoyed that I did not notice that this was an old thread with possibly old history attached to it (although that older history is not apparent from the contents of the thread). I actually imagined all comments in that thread as being made today or overnight, not in September. Once again, before you start in on berating me for that ignorancde, think about your own glass house, which you fully admit to later in your message. In my opinion it is equally ignorant or not ignorant to do what you did: not realize that I had joined the forum too late to know what all this shit was about.

"So if you were so frickin baffled, you should have asked a question, instead of appearing like a clueless numbskull and saying that I call everyone that disagrees with me a flamer."

We've been over this above. Your rudeness was really uncalled for here, especially since you were utterly incorrect about my not asking a question. I didn't just ask you the question I considered most relevant given everything I knew and didn't know, by the way, I then bent over backwards to get you to see through your strong prejudice toward me (of course I've noticed it) that it actually was a genuinely meant question and precisely NOT a critical comment on your behavior (which is what a rhetorical question would have been.) Once again, here's a verbatim quote of what I said right after my question:

"These aren't rhetorcial questions. If there is an actual reason for this rather than saying "I disagree that Lance is a misogynist," I'd like to hear it."

I said all this precisely so you wouldn't get all huffy and think I was underhandedly attacking you, when I was merely asking for information. If I am certain that somebody is doing something stinky, I never, ever give them an "out" such as this. I never tell them I'm not sure they did what they did because I AM SURE. I never offer up the idea that I think there may be something here I'm not getting. Instead, if I know someone's being an ass, I simply say, very directly, "You, my dear, are STIN-KEY!" If you have read any of my messages, you should know that about me by now. I call them as I see them. And in this case I wasn't sure what to call, if anything, and I was curious, so I asked for more info.

I don't think of you as the type that usually does the stinky thing (applies a negative appellation to somebody simply because you disagree with their comments) and so I thought there might be something here I wasn't getting. So I ASKED. And boy, did I get _something_ back in return! This is clearly a sensitive issue for you or others you care for, probably in many ways I can't even begin to guess at, but please understand that I saw no clear sign up on your door"post" that said "Sensitive! Keep Out!"

" And sorry, I don't track when and who joins this place."

Ok, that's _your_ glass house. I've already told you about mine, above, which is that I don't track dates of threads, so sometimes the things I say will reflect that lack of tracking (just as sometimes the things you say reflect the fact that you don't know what a person in this forum knows or doesn't know about older events).

"As if anyone is that important. I don't think Lav needs you defending her,"

I don't know if she needs defense or not but the bottom line is, I wasn't defending her even if that turns out to be random a side-effect of our conversation, I wasn't even thinking about her. I don't know her aside from this one post. I was asking asking _you_, the person I was interested in, if you were pulling a stinky trick or not. I was utterly focused on what you were posting, not on her, except in the sense that if some woman did post a misogynistic joke about Lance, I could relate to the motive to do so.

"Nor did you ever hear both sides of the story, as is clear by the lack of posts from you asking for the entire picture. "

What entire picture??? PBW, to continue the metaphor, I wasn't even aware that I was in a friggin' museum! I asked exactly what I wanted to know, which was about what seemed to be your immediate behavior. I didn't even know there was a story here so how could I ask about it? It's just dumb to continue to accuse someone of not knowing that a person in a thread is talking about some past historical event and not something current, when she wasn't even there (as I claimed in my first response to you) to witness the event. In more concrete terms, your "hired flamethrower" remark looked like just the kind of insult somebody uses to shut someone up, not as an accurate descripton of what this person is, based on past activity. I mean, why in the world should I assume one instance of name calling (that's what it looked like to me) has more meaning than any other name-calling? Nine times out of ten the name-calling is just that: meaningless expressions of hostility, and doesn't have any deeper meaning or history than that person A is pissed at person B. To look for deeper meanings when there are usually none is the height of folly, IMO. This means of course, that if my figures are correct, then one time in ten I will be, as in this case, wrong. That's fine with me. It's the fact that I guess right in nine other instances that I care about. The overall success rate, in other words.

"Instead, you snapped to a judgement based solely on the fact that I said something negative about another woman who also happens to dislike Lance. "

I didn't snap to any decision. I described the general pattern and then asked you if it accurately described what you were doing.

"I apologize if you think I'm being harsh and unfair with you, but I have a real problem with you judging me about anything. "

Why do you have trouble with the idea that I might be judging you? I'm just another poster here, who cares what I think, unless of course you want to set the record straight. That's my primary motivation, anyway, for responding to people who judge me...except of course when I have them on ignore. Then I don't know what they're saying and just go on my merry way.

I wasn't judging you in my first message, but I did judge you in the second message of being over-defensive and I am also judging you now of being of the same thing. I have no idea if it was because of this specific issue and some buttons it pushed, if it was because I was the one asking you the question (the question you chose to turn into a judgement of you) or if you're just generally angru if someone appears to be criticizing you. Whatever it is, it IS over-defensive. This particuar message was especially out of line, given my friendly attempt to explain what was going on in my other post.

It feels to me like you're saying, "Sorry Unda, but no matter what nice things you say or how carefully and sensitively you say it, I'm going to read hostility into EVERYTHING you write. Every single word. Because I know you're just a mean bitch OUT TO GET ME!" If that IS how you feel, then you should have told me directly and long ago, so that I could have put you on ignore and none of this stupid stuff would have happened!

"PBW "I got some from-unda"

LOL, and just what did you get from me? Are you referring to my ten-ton dump truck of explanations? Those I will bestow freely on all and sundry...at least once. Maybe twice, if I'm in a good mood. After that, it's plonk city and blessed quiet for Unda.

Unda

 

[zipman]

The above post is the BDSM Forum's version of War and Peace, by UCE.

The more interesting dynamic is that often, a person attributes a variety of characteristics about an entire forum rather than doing a little self-examination to understand why they seem to have difficulty relating to others in an online forum.

 

[P. B. Walker]

Jesus H. Christ...

Do you expect me to read all that shit? Where's the cliff notes?

Frickin A.

Tell ya what... if I get, like 30 or 45 mins later tonight to read all that stuff, I'll reply (if it's necessary). If not, guess what... you win just by being able to bury me by pure volume of shit.

You don't do anythign frickin short do ya?

PBW

 

[UCE]

Jesus H. Christ...

Do you expect me to read all that shit? Where's the cliff notes?

Frickin A.

Tell ya what... if I get, like 30 or 45 mins later tonight to read all that stuff, I'll reply (if it's necessary). If not, guess what... you win just by being able to bury me by pure volume of shit.

You don't do anythign frickin short do ya?

PBW

LOL, no I don't! When God passed out Concise, I was behind the door, writing all of shakespheare's works.

 

[rosco rathbone]

You cannot I repeat cannot fuck with yuice (rhymes with juice). She is a pro-fessional word-smith and she will bury your ass every time. Every time, I say.

 

[pierced_boy]

Lance

Quote Seems to me that if your goal were to stand on your own two feet, you'd do so.

As it stands, you've just made the very argument you say you were trying to disprove.

Consequently, you now look like either a toady or a liar.

Apology accepted, no harm done to me in this.

Lance Quote


Lance I don't know how you got that out of the post but this is the plain message.

1 I am not now nor have ever been in your pocket (or anybody elses), much less a puppet or fan.

2 Folk Change, you have, as demonstrated by some of your more recent posts and threads.

3 Roland the Headless Thompson Gunner is a Warren Zevon artifact with meaning of its own. Jaunty little number about war. This appears to have gone through to the catcher.

4 The apology is real and I thank you for accepting it and for not finding harm in the post.

5 In my opinion OO and its protege "the three latin named on who cannot be questioned" are fair game WHILE they pursue this negative and unpleasant attack on folk going about their life in cyber space. Whatever they get is fair by me. They could of course move on and start addressing real issues of BDSM or even fluff. It would be preferable to the crap and heat generated by this flaming. WHYhave they got their lingerie in disarray. The place was fine untill they stuck thier paws in. Are they jealous? Mystifying to me. any way enough of a ramble from insignificant old me.

As an aside it is clear we are allowing ourselves to be manipulated to varying degrees by the OO thingy and "the three latin named one who must not be questioned" both feel that they have a right to interrogate folk here. Why and why do we respond? Dinosaur Brains I guess. This place is about questions on the topic BDSM with plenty of room for FRIENDLY banter. OO wants it to be something else WHY?

The ignore function works well. Some threads disappear altogether! This place is realy very peaceful when you cruise with the right controls set.

best to you Lance

Hi Zip and PBW I think you have it just about right

bye bye
Harry

PS UCE the Christmas wishes are an oblique way of saying that I don't intend seeing or corresponding with you before that event. While it was not entirely disingenuous it was meant largely as GOOD BYE

Have a nice day.

H

 

[SexyChele]

Well, dayum! I'd say we have a Lit BDSM record for longest post ever! (Never mind what the fuck it says - who has the time to read, or care about it?)

PBW - LOVE the av! Don't know why, though. Maybe the "look"? Maybe more of the bod in view? Not sure, but I like it!

 

[Freya]

Ok, you all have permission to shoot me. I cannot believe I read that friggin post, UCE! Goddamnit!

How bored am I? Let me count the ways.

 

[SexyChele]

Ok, you all have permission to shoot me. I cannot believe I read that friggin post, UCE! Goddamnit!

How bored am I? Let me count the ways.

So, would you care to give the rest of us a brief synopsis? Or should we all just wait for the movie to come out?

 

[Freya]

So, would you care to give the rest of us a brief synopsis? Or should we all just wait for the movie to come out?

UCE wasn't here for the Great Wars, hence didn't know why PBW made that comment to Lavender. When she asked him, he got uptight because he felt she was attacking him for flaming. She repeated her question, still slightly snippily (sorry UCE), PBW got his back up more and so she dissected every word into tiny little pieces and explained why she felt that he shouldn't have been so uptight over her original question.

Basically UCE didn't check dates on the thread and made a comment assuming it was a recent thing. PBW didn't check UCE's start date and so made comments assuming she was jumping on him for defending Lance without knowing the situation.

So, to summarize, both need to check dates. And I'm almost as fucking long winded as UCE - I think she's contagious.

 

[P. B. Walker]

PBW - LOVE the av! Don't know why, though. Maybe the "look"? Maybe more of the bod in view? Not sure, but I like it!

Awww thanks SC I almost didn't post it cus I thought it was kinda dorky... just don't ask for a nudie version... lmao

PBW

 

[P. B. Walker]

Ok, you all have permission to shoot me. I cannot believe I read that friggin post, UCE! Goddamnit!

How bored am I? Let me count the ways.

Well you won't be shot... but a spanking might be in order... or worse... a tickling

Thank you for that summary. Gawd you saved me an hours worth of reading. Doesn't sound like I need to reply to anything.

Smooochers

PBW "Can I call you Clif now?"

 

[SexyChele]

UCE wasn't here for the Great Wars, hence didn't know why PBW made that comment to Lavender. When she asked him, he got uptight because he felt she was attacking him for flaming. She repeated her question, still slightly snippily (sorry UCE), PBW got his back up more and so she dissected every word into tiny little pieces and explained why she felt that he shouldn't have been so uptight over her original question.

Basically UCE didn't check dates on the thread and made a comment assuming it was a recent thing. PBW didn't check UCE's start date and so made comments assuming she was jumping on him for defending Lance without knowing the situation.

So, to summarize, both need to check dates. And I'm almost as fucking long winded as UCE - I think she's contagious.

Cool - and thanks! Sounds like same old, same old, though!

 

[SexyChele]

Awww thanks SC I almost didn't post it cus I thought it was kinda dorky... just don't ask for a nudie version... lmao

PBW

Dorky? You? Nah, never! And as for nudie pics, let's not forget about those amatuer pics, now. Just gotta put the bottom half below the top half and *BAM* get the "whole" picture!

Man, I think I need to go read a book or something....

 

[Cirrus]

Wow, old thread.

But you know what? I like Lance because he takes everything here as it should be taken: not all that damn seriously.

There are a lot here that could learn from him.

 

[UCE]

UCE wasn't here for the Great Wars, hence didn't know why PBW made that comment to Lavender. When she asked him, he got uptight because he felt she was attacking him for flaming. She repeated her question, still slightly snippily (sorry UCE), PBW got his back up more and so she dissected every word into tiny little pieces and explained why she felt that he shouldn't have been so uptight over her original question.

Basically UCE didn't check dates on the thread and made a comment assuming it was a recent thing. PBW didn't check UCE's start date and so made comments assuming she was jumping on him for defending Lance without knowing the situation.

So, to summarize, both need to check dates. And I'm almost as fucking long winded as UCE - I think she's contagious.

You were not nearly as long-winded as I was, that is a really good and concise description of a long series of long messages. The only part that wasn't true is the snippy part. I was honestly being nice, I thought. So I guess if I came across as snippy, I need "Unsnippy" lessons! In the meantime, I guess I'll continue to get myself in trouble.

Unda

 

[UCE]

Well you won't be shot... but a spanking might be in order... or worse... a tickling

Thank you for that summary. Gawd you saved me an hours worth of reading. Doesn't sound like I need to reply to anything.

Smooochers

PBW "Can I call you Clif now?"

Oh come on! Please read it! F's summary was right on, but I put a lot of effort into it and I tried to be very nice about the whole thing.

 

[UCE]

You cannot I repeat cannot fuck with yuice (rhymes with juice). She is a pro-fessional word-smith and she will bury your ass every time. Every time, I say.

Did YOU read that whole long thing? Oh thank the lord someone did!