God is a Fake

[falcon9]

Knock it off with the baiting.  I didn't come in here tonight talking about trolling, until after the duroz person decided to award some prizes and somebody had brought it up.  

I read the sequence of events, even while participating in the exhanges.  First, the two of you, ("jcribb16" & "Sheryls"), decided to _initate_ a series of trolling posts and then, when that was 'awarded prizes', decided you didn't want to talk about your own trolling, (preferring to call others "trolls" using baseless opinion to define non-trolling posts instead).

This isn't "baiting"; it's responding to your side-swipes.

[falcon9]

I don't know how she ever understood a word you said then if this was all the better she could do...or maybe she dumbed it down alot.

Neither my grandmother nor I engaged in 'dumbing-down' and understood one another perfectly nevertheless.

[falcon9]

wow, it's like neither ever finished grade school.

Are you still stuck on that 'junior highschool girlish' immaturity thing of yours?  If so, you omitted the obligatory *giggle* this time.  

One can post Quote from: SherylsShado on Today at 02:38:44 pm above the quote if it pleases however, when one posts "jcribb" and then the quote, proper posting says this is to indicate that jcribb said the quote.  If one was trying to address her, then one should have posted the quote and then addressed her before or after the quote---NOT with it.  DUH!

Since you're the "one" who posted the address to "jcribb" by preceding it with the "quote" brackets, I assume you'll be listening to your own advice.

[SherylsShado]

Knock it off with the baiting.  I didn't come in here tonight talking about trolling, until after the duroz person decided to award some prizes and somebody had brought it up.  

I read the sequence of events, even while participating in the exhanges.  First, the two of you, ("jcribb16" & "Sheryls"), decided to _initate_ a series of trolling posts and then, when that was 'awarded prizes', decided you didn't want to talk about your own trolling, (preferring to call others "trolls" using baseless opinion to define non-trolling posts instead).

This isn't "baiting"; it's responding to your side-swipes.

hmmm...I haven't been "trolling", I've been debating and discussing.  Can't help it if you don't agree with me, I'm entitled to believe what I want--just like you.

[SherylsShado]

Since you're the "one" who posted the address to "jcribb" by preceding it with the "quote" brackets, I assume you'll be listening to your own advice.

My original post was only for jcribb, that's why it is what it is.  If someone is going to use it, they need to use it in the right context.  (Just like if someone is going to dissect someone's every sentence, they might want to make sure they keep it in proper context UNLESS they have to manipulate it to mean what they want it to.)  I have to explain that....reeaally?  *More giggling, sorry...it's funny.

[jcribb16]

Too subtle?  Would 'hey you' be better?

You misspelled it, duh...

Of course I did ... and that was too subtle.  Oh well, they say that sarcasm loses something if it must be explained.

I think your sarcasm was in poor taste.  You asked me not to call you falcon and I changed it.  You needn't get so sarcastic.  It's jcribb16 to you.

[falcon9]

I think your sarcasm was in poor taste.

How was mispelling your 'nym in poor taste?  If that was my intent, I could have mispelled it much differently. 

You asked me not to call you falcon and I changed it.

Nope, you just did it again.  That's alright, I was trying to make a point and that whooshing sound was it flying overhead.
 

You needn't get so sarcastic.  It's jcribb16 to you.

Conversely, you needed tell me how to "get".  Since "jcribb16" is merely a screen name, "hey you" would probably suffice.

[falcon9]

My original post was only for jcribb, that's why it is what it is.

Right and what it is was your talking about me to her, (e.g., 'gossiping'). Since you gossiped in a public forum, anyone who wishes to reply may do so.

If someone is going to use it, they need to use it in the right context.  (Just like if someone is going to dissect someone's every sentence, they might want to make sure they keep it in proper context UNLESS they have to manipulate it to mean what they want it to.)

It was used in context, even though your method of address may have partly muddled the contextual attributions momentarily.  As for "dissecting" replies, these are quoted in context without any 'manipulation', (which is a false accusation lacking evidence). 
 

[jcribb16]

Knock it off with the baiting.  I didn't come in here tonight talking about trolling, until after the duroz person decided to award some prizes and somebody had brought it up.  

I read the sequence of events, even while participating in the exhanges.  First, the two of you, ("jcribb16" & "Sheryls"), decided to _initate_ a series of trolling posts and then, when that was 'awarded prizes', decided you didn't want to talk about your own trolling, (preferring to call others "trolls" using baseless opinion to define non-trolling posts instead).

This isn't "baiting"; it's responding to your side-swipes.

hmmm...I haven't been "trolling", I've been debating and discussing.  Can't help it if you don't agree with me, I'm entitled to believe what I want--just like you.

It seems to be okay for them to say things and be sarcastic, but no one else had better do that.  

[jcribb16]

My original post was only for jcribb, that's why it is what it is.

Right and what it is was your talking about me to her, (e.g., 'gossiping'). Since you gossiped in a public forum, anyone who wishes to reply may do so.

If someone is going to use it, they need to use it in the right context.  (Just like if someone is going to dissect someone's every sentence, they might want to make sure they keep it in proper context UNLESS they have to manipulate it to mean what they want it to.)

It was used in context, even though your method of address may have partly muddled the contextual attributions momentarily.  As for "dissecting" replies, these are quoted in context without any 'manipulation', (which is a false accusation lacking evidence). 
 

You and duroz; you and Falconer; were also "gossiping."

[falcon9]

hmmm...I haven't been "trolling", I've been debating and discussing.

Your bland denial is belied by your previous trolling posts, (message IDs available however, one merely needs to scroll down this thread and the thread about criticisms).  

Can't help it if you don't agree with me, I'm entitled to believe what I want--just like you.

While you latest posts barely fall under the "discuss" part of D+D, they fail to qualify as legitimate "debate".  Yes, you are "entitled" to believe whatever nonsense floats your boat, just as I am "entitled" to challenge unsupported opinions/assertions/beliefs. I can't help it if rationality disturbs the pseudo-comfort of your irrationality.  This should not prevent you from burying your head in the sand, putting your hands over your ears or, clinging desparately to blind faith.

[falcon9]

You and duroz; you and Falconer; were also "gossiping."

Show the message IDs, in context, (that is, include the posts replied to), as evidence.  Or, continue making unsupported assertions.  Your choice.

[falcon9]

It seems to be okay for them to say things and be sarcastic, but no one else had better do that.  

The difference is that those replies were replies in response to things _initiated_ by you and "Sheryls" in this instance.  Obviously, it is in your interest to pretend otherwise however, the posts are still available in the applicable threads and they don't support your contention.  Shocking, no?

[SherylsShado]

My original post was only for jcribb, that's why it is what it is.

Right and what it is was your talking about me to her, (e.g., 'gossiping'). Since you gossiped in a public forum, anyone who wishes to reply may do so.

  huh??  I posted a quote for her and her only.  I wasn't the author of the quote hence, wasn't gossiping at all.  You have a strange interpretation of things in this forum, makes me wonder about your interpretation of bigger things...

[SherylsShado]

While you latest posts barely fall under the "discuss" part of D+D, they fail to qualify as legitimate "debate".  Yes, you are "entitled" to believe whatever nonsense floats your boat, just as I am "entitled" to challenge unsupported opinions/assertions/beliefs. I can't help it if rationality disturbs the pseudo-comfort of your irrationality.  This should not prevent you from burying your head in the sand, putting your hands over your ears or, clinging desparately to blind faith.

ok there sweetie...calm down before you have a stroke and can't remember your BIG words, gosh I'd feel so bad.