The Stupid Part of "No Food For Fat People"

[wez]

That's what is the riot.. I agree with TJ, point out his double standard in his rediclious labeling of me and rather than admit it, he crys a river to anyone who will listen and launches into personal attacks and hypocrisy and claims it's me... Hahahahahahaha... What's new? You're not special TJ.. I'm used to it, unfortunately for you...

 

 

$5000 bucks says TJ's next post is a lengthy pity party of how IWS is harassing and personally attacking him...

[timesjoke]

Not an attack on you but

 

If your feel that comment is needed, obviously you do see it as an attack.

 

 

I didn't see anyones possition attacked in the comment you quoted other then Bush being called a liberal for giving away money.

 

Right, that is an attack, why must someone be labeled a liberal just because they have done something a liberal would do?

 

Am I suddenly a woman or gay if I pick up a purse to look at it? Am I black if I like to eat watermellon? Am I an accountant if I own my own adding machine?

 

 

I agree. There is money going to people in the form of "tax refunds" and "rebates" that exceeds what they paid in for taxes. That is neither a refund or a rebate. Lets call a spade a spade. It's either a handout at that point or welfare.

 

That's liberal crap and being pushed by an alleged conservative President. Ergo Bush is acting as a liberal.

 

Again, why the attack on his no longer being a conservative if he does one thing that looks liberal? Again, shades of gray.

 

Besides, clearly he was not acting as a liberal because the liberals have held it up saying Bush did not allow enough free money to be given out.

 

 

So are are we not supposed to include quotes from other people to support our point any more? If so the entire thread on No Food For Fat People needs to be erased. That's all is on that thread.

 

I gacve short quotes in that thread about corruption, everhthing else I posted was from me.

 

 

I don't see anythign worng with offering quotes to "support" an idea, but when it is the "only" thing you can offer because you don't have a working knowledge of the topic yourself, why even post?

 

 

Glad to see you are above personal attacks.

 

I never said I was above personal attacks, but it is not "all" I have to offer or bring to the table.

 

 

As far as editing you post unless you go back and completely change it to refute someones reply, I would much rather someone go in and edit their own spelling or whatever mistakes themselves then times when I have had to do it (and have done so for several members) to make sure the message is brought across as it was intended and some noob with an empty arsonal (and a few forum veterans) begin the whole spelling and grammar police crap.

 

Wez has been posting on forums a long time now, clearly using the preview tab would help him but many times he will keep thinking of stuff he wants to add instead of just thinking through his post before making it.

 

That proves he is posting out of anger, not thinking things through past his need to strike out at someone.

 

The childish crap has to stop or this thread will dissappear, just like Abortion Smoothie. Before anyone blames anyone, we all know it often starts with Wez (you know it's true and we had an agreement) but this time it wasn't him.

 

Yes it was started by Wez, no he did not attack me directly, but he attacked the idea of conservatism. He knows I am a conservative so he decided a backward insult was good enough to get the ball rolling.

 

Wez is a very smart person, clearly smart enough to fool you.

 

Look at my posts here, you will even see me complimenting him saying he has many good points, but he ruins his points with the added garbage.

 

 

The difference you refuse to see is while I can see his good points, all he can see is his hatred.

 

 

Here is where wez jumped in on the tread before it got out of hand.

 

 

 

He appeared to be agreeing with you about decreasing Federal social programs.

 

And insulted me calling me a liberal. Maybe you like being called something your not, I don't.

 

 

Even Brotherman was civil enough to ask about the interpretation.

 

I can't speak on brotherman's reasons for anything.

 

 

I may be wrong and Old Salt may be wrong but I assumed he meant the Libertarian party.

 

You assumed, if you feel justified to assume one way, why am I wrong for assuming he meant what he said?

 

Then you decided to take the low road this time, and I know you usually don't but you did with this response to Brotherman and talking about wez.

 

So in your opinion, I should completely ignore a clear comment by Wez calling me a liberal and I should "assume" he meant what he did not say right?

 

 

I am taking the low road just because I took Wez for his word?

 

 

You have the power to do what you want, feel free to do just that, but your 100% wrong.

 

 

It seems everyone needs to take a step back and regroup to a civil debate.

 

And yet in almost every example of the loss of civility, Wez is involved, but you don't care about that do you?

 

 

(Pardon my quoting of others if that bothers you but I probably will still quote others on this board and politcal and public figures from time to time. I would also like to appologize for my lack of proofreading. I'm at work and in a hurry)

 

 

 

And a passing jab at me at the end to prove your true motivation for making the post in the first place, nice touch.

 

You gonna threaten to ban me again?

 

The second you put this much attention and energy into dealing with Wez (you admit he is the biggest problem) it the second I will consider you really care about keeping the peace on the forum.

 

 

 

actually IWS, wez did mean "Liberal party", not Libertarian, and it was most definitely meant as a slam on TJ.

 

 

You have to understand the mind of wez and how it works: His goal with most of his replies is to point out the hypocrisy of someone else (he has said this himself many times,) and him calling TJ a "liberal" was an attempt at showing the hypocrisy of TJ calling wez a liberal in another thread. Wez was baiting, plain and simple.

 

IWS has had some issues with me so is most likely just using this as an excuse to take a shot at me.

[wez]

If your feel that comment is needed, obviously you do see it as an attack.

 

 

 

 

Right, that is an attack, why must someone be labeled a liberal just because they have done something a liberal would do?

 

Am I suddenly a woman or gay if I pick up a purse to look at it? Am I black if I like to eat watermellon? Am I an accountant if I own my own adding machine?

 

 

 

 

Again, why the attack on his no longer being a conservative if he does one thing that looks liberal? Again, shades of gray.

 

Besides, clearly he was not acting as a liberal because the liberals have held it up saying Bush did not allow enough free money to be given out.

 

 

 

 

I gacve short quotes in that thread about corruption, everhthing else I posted was from me.

 

 

I don't see anythign worng with offering quotes to "support" an idea, but when it is the "only" thing you can offer because you don't have a working knowledge of the topic yourself, why even post?

 

 

 

 

I never said I was above personal attacks, but it is not "all" I have to offer or bring to the table.

 

 

 

 

Wez has been posting on forums a long time now, clearly using the preview tab would help him but many times he will keep thinking of stuff he wants to add instead of just thinking through his post before making it.

 

That proves he is posting out of anger, not thinking things through past his need to strike out at someone.

 

 

 

Yes it was started by Wez, no he did not attack me directly, but he attacked the idea of conservatism. He knows I am a conservative so he decided a backward insult was good enough to get the ball rolling.

 

Wez is a very smart person, clearly smart enough to fool you.

 

Look at my posts here, you will even see me complimenting him saying he has many good points, but he ruins his points with the added garbage.

 

 

The difference you refuse to see is while I can see his good points, all he can see is his hatred.

 

 

 

 

And insulted me calling me a liberal. Maybe you like being called something your not, I don't.

 

 

 

 

I can't speak on brotherman's reasons for anything.

 

 

 

 

You assumed, if you feel justified to assume one way, why am I wrong for assuming he meant what he said?

 

 

 

So in your opinion, I should completely ignore a clear comment by Wez calling me a liberal and I should "assume" he meant what he did not say right?

 

 

I am taking the low road just because I took Wez for his word?

 

 

You have the power to do what you want, feel free to do just that, but your 100% wrong.

 

 

 

 

And yet in almost every example of the loss of civility, Wez is involved, but you don't care about that do you?

 

 

 

 

 

 

And a passing jab at me at the end to prove your true motivation for making the post in the first place, nice touch.

 

You gonna threaten to ban me again?

 

The second you put this much attention and energy into dealing with Wez (you admit he is the biggest problem) it the second I will consider you really care about keeping the peace on the forum.

 

 

 

 

 

IWS has had some issues with me so is most likely just using this as an excuse to take a shot at me.

 

 

You call me a liberal all the time TJ, am I suppose to ignore it? Call me whatever you want, I don't give a crap, you do.. Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa I hate getting what I give and having it clearly pointed out to me so I cry a river and claim victimhood when it crashes down on me because if I don't admit it, it doesn't exist.. Hahahahahahahaha

 

 

What are IWS's issues with you? The truth? How terrible...

 

 

If you hate getting what you give so bad TJ, why don't you try giving what you love? Might help with the frustration... You'll get no validation for your insanity from me.

 

I've seen your posts changed.. perhaps the preview button and yourself should become lovers..

[ImWithStupid]

actually IWS, wez did mean "Liberal party", not Libertarian, and it was most definitely meant as a slam on TJ.

 

I guess since captiolized "Liberal" and to my knowledge there isn't a Liberal party but there is a Libertarian party, I assumed the proper name was mean for Libertarian.

[wez]

How about this TJ... explain to me why I'm a liberal and Bush isn't? I never orchestrated a welfare check printing helicopter drop.. if one acts like a liberal, are they not a liberal? Enlighten me..

 

isn't artificially inflating asset prices, (stocks, real estate, etc) to throw some welfare to your buddies so they can afford to party with you in the Hamptons fairly liberal?

[wez]

I guess since captiolized "Liberal" and to my knowledge there isn't a Liberal party but there is a Libertarian party, I assumed the proper name was mean for Libertarian.

 

 

Someday I may get a clear understanding of "liberal" from those who toss it around as a debate tactic if you agree with them and they don't like you because you said soldiers were mindless killers 6 months ago... Hahahahahaha

[snafu]

Not an attack on you but

 

 

 

I didn't see anyones possition attacked in the comment you quoted other then Bush being called a liberal for giving away money.

 

I agree. There is money going to people in the form of "tax refunds" and "rebates" that exceeds what they paid in for taxes. That is neither a refund or a rebate. Lets call a spade a spade. It's either a handout at that point or welfare.

 

That's liberal crap and being pushed by an alleged conservative President. Ergo Bush is acting as a liberal.

 

 

 

So are are we not supposed to include quotes from other people to support our point any more? If so the entire thread on No Food For Fat People needs to be erased. That's all is on that thread.

 

 

 

Glad to see you are above personal attacks.

 

As far as editing you post unless you go back and completely change it to refute someones reply, I would much rather someone go in and edit their own spelling or whatever mistakes themselves then times when I have had to do it (and have done so for several members) to make sure the message is brought across as it was intended and some noob with an empty arsonal (and a few forum veterans) begin the whole spelling and grammar police crap.

 

The childish crap has to stop or this thread will dissappear, just like Abortion Smoothie. Before anyone blames anyone, we all know it often starts with Wez (you know it's true and we had an agreement) but this time it wasn't him.

 

 

 

Here is where wez jumped in on the tread before it got out of hand.

 

 

 

He appeared to be agreeing with you about decreasing Federal social programs.

 

Even Brotherman was civil enough to ask about the interpretation.

 

 

 

I may be wrong and Old Salt may be wrong but I assumed he meant the Libertarian party.

 

Then you decided to take the low road this time, and I know you usually don't but you did with this response to Brotherman and talking about wez.

 

 

 

It seems everyone needs to take a step back and regroup to a civil debate.

 

(Pardon my quoting of others if that bothers you but I probably will still quote others on this board and politcal and public figures from time to time. I would also like to appologize for my lack of proofreading. I'm at work and in a hurry)

 

I gotta agree with IWS on this.

[ImWithStupid]

If your feel that comment is needed, obviously you do see it as an attack.

 

Right, that is an attack, why must someone be labeled a liberal just because they have done something a liberal would do?

 

Again, why the attack on his no longer being a conservative if he does one thing that looks liberal? Again, shades of gray.

 

Besides, clearly he was not acting as a liberal because the liberals have held it up saying Bush did not allow enough free money to be given out.

 

This happens all the time in poitics. Look at John McCain. Even though he has 25 years of conservative actions, he recently did some things that were unpopular with conservatives and he comes under fire for not being conservative enough even if those things were what he truly felt were best for the country. Another example on the flip side is Joe Lieberman. The liberals didn't think he wasn't liberal enough so he lost his parties backing but still won the Senate race as an Independant.

 

I gacve short quotes in that thread about corruption, everhthing else I posted was from me.[/quote

 

I don't see anythign worng with offering quotes to "support" an idea, but when it is the "only" thing you can offer because you don't have a working knowledge of the topic yourself, why even post?

 

I was referring mostly to Hugo and his federalist papers and such.

 

I never said I was above personal attacks, but it is not "all" I have to offer or bring to the table.

 

My point is don't complain about others doing something if you aren't willing to take the high road and refrain from the same. The whole "Glass houses" thing. I had the same conversation with Brotherman and he seems to be willing to take the advise.

 

 

Wez has been posting on forums a long time now, clearly using the preview tab would help him but many times he will keep thinking of stuff he wants to add instead of just thinking through his post before making it.

 

That proves he is posting out of anger, not thinking things through past his need to strike out at someone.

 

There are many people who are veteran posters that realize that something added would make the point more relevant. I'm referring to your assessment of wez or about anyone else in particular but with the shoubox I've seen it from many people including eddo and myself and many others.

 

Yes it was started by Wez, no he did not attack me directly, but he attacked the idea of conservatism. He knows I am a conservative so he decided a backward insult was good enough to get the ball rolling.

 

Just because he attacked conservatism doesn't mean that a personal attack on a poster is needed.

 

Wez is a very smart person, clearly smart enough to fool you.

 

Look at my posts here, you will even see me complimenting him saying he has many good points, but he ruins his points with the added garbage.

 

You are now saying wez is smart, smart enough to fool me (a personal attack at me) and that you compliment him in posts. But this is your comment.

 

I don]ever[/b'] knows what he is saying.

 

This sounds like both an unnecessary personal attack and probably made in the heat of the moment.

 

And insulted me calling me a liberal. Maybe you like being called something your not, I don't.

 

I guess If I feel that I interpret someones statement as incorrect, then I would prefer to attempt to refute the comment, and if the person is unwilling to acknowledge that I know myself better than someone on an internet forum, that's their issue not mine.

 

I can't speak on brotherman's reasons for anything.

 

You assumed, if you feel justified to assume one way, why am I wrong for assuming he meant what he said?

 

So in your opinion, I should completely ignore a clear comment by Wez calling me a liberal and I should "assume" he meant what he did not say right?

 

No that is not my opinion. The difference is, I assumed I knew what was intended by the use of the capital "L" and accepted my assumption, Old Salt asked for clarification and Brotherman even asked for clarification. You on the other hand resorted to a personal attack.

 

I am taking the low road just because I took Wez for his word?

 

No, It was when you decided to say that he doesn't ever know what he is talking about. This was out of character for you and it was around this point that the thread went south.

 

And a passing jab at me at the end to prove your true motivation for making the post in the first place, nice touch.

 

You gonna threaten to ban me again?

 

The second you put this much attention and energy into dealing with Wez (you admit he is the biggest problem) it the second I will consider you really care about keeping the peace on the forum.

 

IWS has had some issues with me so is most likely just using this as an excuse to take a shot at me.

 

The comment was a joke as I was at that time walking out the door for a meeting.

 

I never threatened to ban you. You interpreted a comment on your posting style that had resulted in you being banned on other sites as a threat. It was never intended to be.

 

I have given much attention to wez and even some with others on this board, privately, by PM. The diffierence is that unlike you, they responded kindly to my PMs and never came back to a thread claiming that I said things that I didn't or implied things that I didn't.

 

That is why I have had to keep my corrospondance with you public so everyone knows what is truly said or implied.

 

The main point is Brotherman accused me of not moderating enough. I am trying to do this as much as possible.

 

Like I said in my first post. I didn't mean to imply you were the only one involved in this but you did make the first "Personal Attack" on someone on this. If being implied that some of your views are liberal means that you are one, and that upsets you, I guess then we should call wez a conservative because he agreed with you about getting rid of social programs.

[hugo]

 

I was referring mostly to Hugo and his federalist papers and such.

 

 

 

 

Our Constitution is a contract. When the meaning of parts of a contract are in question what should be done is to attempt to find out the original intent of the parties to the contract were. The Federalist Papers were written during the ratifying process. The Federalist Papers are not mere opinions. If they are false our constitution was ratified under false pretenses.

[wez]

Veteren poster for wez is 3 years.. 2 1/2 at the Jungle, 6 months here...

 

I'm more of a veteren hypocrite, double standard f cker wither.. 20 + years... Even funner online than face to face.. they get angry to the point of physical violence when confronted with their inconsistencies and illusions....

[ImWithStupid]

Our Constitution is a contract. When the meaning of parts of a contract are in question what should be done is to attempt to find out the original intent of the parties to the contract were. The Federalist Papers were written during the ratifying process. The Federalist Papers are not mere opinions. If they are false our constitution was ratified under false pretenses.

 

I was replying to Timesjoke's criticism of wez quoting too much. I meant that there were many (relevent I might add) quotes in the thread. I wasn't bashing you.

 

I have no problem with quoting other people or historical speeches and writings.

[wez]

I was replying to Timesjoke's criticism of wez quoting too much. I meant that there were many (relevent I might add) quotes in the thread. I wasn't bashing you.

 

I have no problem with quoting other people or historical speeches and writings.

 

I think Hugo's an ace at finding and quoting relevant, intelligent articles.. TJ is the only quote user when it suits him, quote hater when it suits him I've noticed around these parts..

[timesjoke]

This happens all the time in poitics. Look at John McCain. Even though he has 25 years of conservative actions, he recently did some things that were unpopular with conservatives and he comes under fire for not being conservative enough even if those things were what he truly felt were best for the country. Another example on the flip side is Joe Lieberman. The liberals didn't think he wasn't liberal enough so he lost his parties backing but still won the Senate race as an Independant.

 

So was that the long version of just agreeing with what I already said?

 

Shades of grey?

 

 

I was referring mostly to Hugo and his federalist papers and such.

 

And I was talking about someolike Wez who only had an opinion he could copy/paste.

 

 

My point is don't complain about others doing something if you aren't willing to take the high road and refrain from the same. The whole "Glass houses" thing. I had the same conversation with Brotherman and he seems to be willing to take the advise.

 

There is nothing wrong with a few jabs back and forth during spirited discussion, I even ask for it on my forum. I put a limit on what I call type 2 personal attacks that are designed to "only" demaen or belittle other people. Someone like Wez would be removed in less than a day because he has never had a discussion with some he does not agree with without making these kinds of attacks.

 

When Wez was blocking me things were very good, but he could not let things go without the strife so he had to start it back up. Clearly he is the instigator, you can either put the blame where it belongs or continue to be wrong and blame me, it is your choice as the man with the power.

 

There are many people who are veteran posters that realize that something added would make the point more relevant. I'm referring to your assessment of wez or about anyone else in particular but with the shoubox I've seen it from many people including eddo and myself and many others.

 

This is why Wez is so bad, you defending him pumps up his nads and he feels justified with his excesses, you only have yourself to blame for the mess here caused by Wez.

 

Yes, editing here and there is normal, editing the same post 15 times is not, this was my point and I know your bringht enough to understand that so by pretending to not know why I said what I said, your admitting to being part of the problem.

 

 

Just because he attacked conservatism doesn't mean that a personal attack on a poster is needed.

 

Never said it did, just giving you the play bny play, his calling me a liberal was the main point.

 

 

You are now saying wez is smart, smart enough to fool me (a personal attack at me) and that you compliment him in posts. But this is your comment.

 

Okay, I started out giving you the benefit of the doubt and he just had you fooled, it was either that or your just helping him.

 

Pointing out that you had to twist his post around to make it innocent is not an attack.

 

 

This sounds like both an unnecessary personal attack and probably made in the heat of the moment.

 

To someone taking his side sure, but read it again and something else is clear, I said I don't "think" he ever knows what he is talking about. Clearly this is my opinion and if your gonna blast me for forming my own opinions based on my observations, what is the point of having any discussion?

 

 

I guess If I feel that I interpret someones statement as incorrect, then I would prefer to attempt to refute the comment, and if the person is unwilling to acknowledge that I know myself better than someone on an internet forum, that's their issue not mine.

 

I have already attempted this with Wez a hundred times, I have also watched others try as well. Wez is completely immune to logic and reasonable discussion.

 

So now I treat him the same as he treats me, but I see you don't openly say anything bad to him, I wonder.......

 

 

No that is not my opinion. The difference is, I assumed I knew what was intended by the use of the capital "L" and accepted my assumption, Old Salt asked for clarification and Brotherman even asked for clarification. You on the other hand resorted to a personal attack.

 

No, I resorted to making an observation based on Wez's long history of attacking everyone who refuses to bow down to him.

 

 

You said it yourself, this entire attack your making on me now is based on "your assumption" of an innocent comment made by Wez that most other people did not assume was innocent. Why is "your assumption" grounds to attack me but I cannot make a comment on what he really did say?

 

If you notice something else, Wez never clarified, so clearly he did mean Liberal. Maybe you should stop making so many assumptions, clearly in this case, your assumption was dead wrong.

 

No, It was when you decided to say that he doesn't ever know what he is talking about. This was out of character for you and it was around this point that the thread went south.

 

So if was out of character for me as you say, then maybe you should have stopped and looked a little closer before jumping to conclusions and blasting me.

 

And I made my comment clearly as my opinion, if openly stating our opinions are now bad on this forum, what is next?

 

 

The comment was a joke as I was at that time walking out the door for a meeting.

 

Then you need to work on your joke skills, it sure did not sound like a joke.

 

I never threatened to ban you. You interpreted a comment on your posting style that had resulted in you being banned on other sites as a threat. It was never intended to be.

 

There iso reason for a staff member to even use the word ban when commenting to members. The only reason it to threaten. Similar to a cop putting his hand on his firearm, he never draws it, but the warning is very clear.

 

 

I have given much attention to wez and even some with others on this board, privately, by PM. The diffierence is that unlike you, they responded kindly to my PMs and never came back to a thread claiming that I said things that I didn't or implied things that I didn't.

 

Right, that is why Wez is still posting personal attacks all over the place, your doing a great job, lol.

 

 

I never lied about anything, you were tossing words like banning in my direction and I called you on it, you later said you never meant anythign about it but I still say there was no reason to bring it up unless you were making threats.

 

I have no problem talking to you in private but public or private the only thing that matters to me is you to get Wez under control and none of this is even necessary. Wez is the common factor to 99% of the problems on this forum, but your spending most of your time on me with what you have already admitted was your wrong assumption.

 

 

That is why I have had to keep my corrospondance with you public so everyone knows what is truly said or implied.

 

I don't care what other people think, I guess you do.

 

I run a couple forums myself and doing my job to keep the peace is all I worry about. Maybe you should stop trying to make friends and do something about the Wez problem instead.

 

 

The main point is Brotherman accused me of not moderating enough. I am trying to do this as much as possible.

 

Going overboard on me for a wrong assumption on your part is not moderating, dealing with Wez is.

 

Take care of Wez, and the rest will fall into place.

 

Like I said in my first post. I didn't mean to imply you were the only one involved in this but you did make the first "Personal Attack" on someone on this. If being implied that some of your views are liberal means that you are one, and that upsets you, I guess then we should call wez a conservative because he agreed with you about getting rid of social programs.

 

As pointed out by eddo, Wez made the first personal attack, so will you give me an appology for wrongsly accusing me of making the first personal attack?

 

 

The only way you can make Wez's comment innocent, is to twist it around, why is it he gets so much understand from you while you go out of your way to bash me?

 

 

Look, I "responded" to Wez, Wez is the problem, deal with it or not as your choice, but stop blaming me for "responding".

[wez]

So was that the long version of just agreeing with what I already said?

 

Shades of grey?

 

 

 

 

And I was talking about someolike Wez who only had an opinion he could copy/paste.

 

 

 

 

There is nothing wrong with a few jabs back and forth during spirited discussion, I even ask for it on my forum. I put a limit on what I call type 2 personal attacks that are designed to "only" demaen or belittle other people. Someone like Wez would be removed in less than a day because he has never had a discussion with some he does not agree with without making these kinds of attacks.

 

When Wez was blocking me things were very good, but he could not let things go without the strife so he had to start it back up. Clearly he is the instigator, you can either put the blame where it belongs or continue to be wrong and blame me, it is your choice as the man with the power.

 

 

 

This is why Wez is so bad, you defending him pumps up his nads and he feels justified with his excesses, you only have yourself to blame for the mess here caused by Wez.

 

Yes, editing here and there is normal, editing the same post 15 times is not, this was my point and I know your bringht enough to understand that so by pretending to not know why I said what I said, your admitting to being part of the problem.

 

 

 

 

Never said it did, just giving you the play bny play, his calling me a liberal was the main point.

 

 

 

 

Okay, I started out giving you the benefit of the doubt and he just had you fooled, it was either that or your just helping him.

 

Pointing out that you had to twist his post around to make it innocent is not an attack.

 

 

 

 

To someone taking his side sure, but read it again and something else is clear, I said I don't "think" he ever knows what he is talking about. Clearly this is my opinion and if your gonna blast me for forming my own opinions based on my observations, what is the point of having any discussion?

 

 

 

 

I have already attempted this with Wez a hundred times, I have also watched others try as well. Wez is completely immune to logic and reasonable discussion.

 

So now I treat him the same as he treats me, but I see you don't openly say anything bad to him, I wonder.......

 

 

 

 

No, I resorted to making an observation based on Wez's long history of attacking everyone who refuses to bow down to him.

 

 

You said it yourself, this entire attack your making on me now is based on "your assumption" of an innocent comment made by Wez that most other people did not assume was innocent. Why is "your assumption" grounds to attack me but I cannot make a comment on what he really did say?

 

If you notice something else, Wez never clarified, so clearly he did mean Liberal. Maybe you should stop making so many assumptions, clearly in this case, your assumption was dead wrong.

 

 

 

So if was out of character for me as you say, then maybe you should have stopped and looked a little closer before jumping to conclusions and blasting me.

 

And I made my comment clearly as my opinion, if openly stating our opinions are now bad on this forum, what is next?

 

 

 

 

Then you need to work on your joke skills, it sure did not sound like a joke.

 

 

 

There iso reason for a staff member to even use the word ban when commenting to members. The only reason it to threaten. Similar to a cop putting his hand on his firearm, he never draws it, but the warning is very clear.

 

 

 

 

Right, that is why Wez is still posting personal attacks all over the place, your doing a great job, lol.

 

 

I never lied about anything, you were tossing words like banning in my direction and I called you on it, you later said you never meant anythign about it but I still say there was no reason to bring it up unless you were making threats.

 

I have no problem talking to you in private but public or private the only thing that matters to me is you to get Wez under control and none of this is even necessary. Wez is the common factor to 99% of the problems on this forum, but your spending most of your time on me with what you have already admitted was your wrong assumption.

 

 

 

 

I don't care what other people think, I guess you do.

 

I run a couple forums myself and doing my job to keep the peace is all I worry about. Maybe you should stop trying to make friends and do something about the Wez problem instead.

 

 

 

 

Going overboard on me for a wrong assumption on your part is not moderating, dealing with Wez is.

 

Take care of Wez, and the rest will fall into place.

 

 

 

As pointed out by eddo, Wez made the first personal attack, so will you give me an appology for wrongsly accusing me of making the first personal attack?

 

 

The only way you can make Wez's comment innocent, is to twist it around, why is it he gets so much understand from you while you go out of your way to bash me?

 

 

Look, I "responded" to Wez, Wez is the problem, deal with it or not as your choice, but stop blaming me for "responding".

 

 

 

You are insane... Act like a f cking man for God's sake. If you can't take it, don't dish it. Pretty simple really.. I'm better at your game than you.. and always will be. Deal with it.

 

I have no desire to validate and please hypocrites. My desire lies in shoving their face in their own vomit and watching them eat their own sh t as they cry victim.. quite pleasurable actually.. Please continue.

 

Tell ya what TJ.. gimme a good, logical reason to allow you to use your bully tactics on me and everyone you disagree with without returning the favor and showing you that you are indeed what you hate so as to please you and allow you to continue your delusions of grandeur and victimhood in peace.. Better be logical. if so, I'll take it into consideration next time you're berating someone for being you..

[timesjoke]

You are insane... Act like a f cking man for God's sake. If you can't take it, don't dish it. Pretty simple really.. I'm better at your game than you.. and always will be. Deal with it.

 

I have no desire to validate and please hypocrites. My desire lies in shoving their face in their own vomit and watching them eat their own sh t as they cry victim.. quite pleasurable actually.. Please continue.

 

Tell ya what TJ.. gimme a good, logical reason to allow you to use your bully tactics on me and everyone you disagree with without returning the favor and showing you that you are indeed what you hate so as to please you and allow you to continue your delusions of grandeur and victimhood in peace.. Better be logical. if so, I'll take it into consideration next time you're berating someone for being you..

 

I know you are but what am I?

 

 

You are exactly what you claim me to be. You call everyone else names but your the biggest problem this forum has. Everyone else is writing me pm's all telling me your an idiot and to just ignore you, well maybe they can let you skate but I can't.

 

Your a well poisoner Wez, plain and simple.

[wez]

I know you are but what am I?

 

 

You are exactly what you claim me to be. You call everyone else names but your the biggest problem this forum has. Everyone else is writing me pm's all telling me your an idiot and to just ignore you, well maybe they can let you skate but I can't.

 

Your a well poisoner Wez, plain and simple.

 

 

Everyone = eddo and brotherman? Hahahahahahaha

 

 

Piss off.. take their advice, specially eddo's. He knows better.. Too bad for him you didn't turn out to be his knight in shining armor.. Hahahahaha

 

I don't let people skate either TJ.. Hmmmmmmmm perhaps the sore spot leading to the constant judgement from the three amigo's?

 

Little advice.. even if "everyone" = the entire human race, it'd change nothing with me. Least they're stroking your ego in pm's now.. Not doing you any favors I might add..

[timesjoke]

Everyone = eddo and brotherman? Hahahahahahaha

 

No, 15 people so far and even IWS told me basically the same thing the last time we had issues. Everyone agrees your an idiot, but their method of dealing with you is to ignore your more irritating tendancy to lie about things just to make your points sound better. When some of us have called you down on your lies, you have turned to personal attacks and childish "I am not you" garbage.

 

 

 

Piss off.. take their advice, specially eddo's. He knows better.. Too bad for him you didn't turn out to be his knight in shining armor.. Hahahahaha

 

No, what is going to happen is the powers that be will most likely ban me and let you do whatever you like out of pity for your stupidity.

 

But no matter what happens, I am done letting you get away with your crap.

[wez]

No, 15 people so far and even IWS told me basically the same thing the last time we had issues. Everyone agrees your an idiot, but their method of dealing with you is to ignore your more irritating tendancy to lie about things just to make your points sound better. When some of us have called you down on your lies, you have turned to personal attacks and childish "I am not you" garbage.

 

 

No, what is going to happen is the powers that be will most likely ban me and let you do whatever you like out of pity for your stupidity.

 

But no matter what happens, I am done letting you get away with your crap.

 

 

15 people!!!! Wow! You are quite popular... now piss off, liar. Tell the 15 to come say it to my face..

 

1/3/15... the more the merrier.. perhaps you can hire 7 more.. or intimidate them with anger.. Hahahahaha

 

Misery not only loves but needs company, and they know how to get it. ~ wez

 

Is it ok to quote myself, sir?

[timesjoke]

15 people!!!! Wow! You are quite popular... now piss off, liar. Tell the 15 to come say it to my face..

 

No, most could care less about me or anyone else, this is an internet forum, not really too important to most people. What seems to be the common thread is not how much anyone likes me but how much they don't like you.

 

 

1/3/15... the more the merrier.. perhaps you can hire 7 more.. or intimidate them with anger.. Hahahahaha

 

Misery not only loves but needs company, and they know how to get it. ~ wez

 

Is it ok to quote myself, sir?

 

I know you don't care, that is why you decided to break the peace by starting to attack me again, you missed the attention.

 

You can't blame this mess on me, from what I have been told, you act this way in every forum you go to, most of them have banned you to keep the peace, I guess you never learn.

[ImWithStupid]

So was that the long version of just agreeing with what I already said?

 

Shades of grey?

 

 

 

 

And I was talking about someolike Wez who only had an opinion he could copy/paste.

 

 

 

 

There is nothing wrong with a few jabs back and forth during spirited discussion, I even ask for it on my forum. I put a limit on what I call type 2 personal attacks that are designed to "only" demaen or belittle other people. Someone like Wez would be removed in less than a day because he has never had a discussion with some he does not agree with without making these kinds of attacks.

 

When Wez was blocking me things were very good, but he could not let things go without the strife so he had to start it back up. Clearly he is the instigator, you can either put the blame where it belongs or continue to be wrong and blame me, it is your choice as the man with the power.

 

 

 

This is why Wez is so bad, you defending him pumps up his nads and he feels justified with his excesses, you only have yourself to blame for the mess here caused by Wez.

 

Yes, editing here and there is normal, editing the same post 15 times is not, this was my point and I know your bringht enough to understand that so by pretending to not know why I said what I said, your admitting to being part of the problem.

 

 

 

 

Never said it did, just giving you the play bny play, his calling me a liberal was the main point.

 

 

 

 

Okay, I started out giving you the benefit of the doubt and he just had you fooled, it was either that or your just helping him.

 

Pointing out that you had to twist his post around to make it innocent is not an attack.

 

 

 

 

To someone taking his side sure, but read it again and something else is clear, I said I don't "think" he ever knows what he is talking about. Clearly this is my opinion and if your gonna blast me for forming my own opinions based on my observations, what is the point of having any discussion?

 

 

 

 

I have already attempted this with Wez a hundred times, I have also watched others try as well. Wez is completely immune to logic and reasonable discussion.

 

So now I treat him the same as he treats me, but I see you don't openly say anything bad to him, I wonder.......

 

 

 

 

No, I resorted to making an observation based on Wez's long history of attacking everyone who refuses to bow down to him.

 

 

You said it yourself, this entire attack your making on me now is based on "your assumption" of an innocent comment made by Wez that most other people did not assume was innocent. Why is "your assumption" grounds to attack me but I cannot make a comment on what he really did say?

 

If you notice something else, Wez never clarified, so clearly he did mean Liberal. Maybe you should stop making so many assumptions, clearly in this case, your assumption was dead wrong.

 

 

 

So if was out of character for me as you say, then maybe you should have stopped and looked a little closer before jumping to conclusions and blasting me.

 

And I made my comment clearly as my opinion, if openly stating our opinions are now bad on this forum, what is next?

 

 

 

 

Then you need to work on your joke skills, it sure did not sound like a joke.

 

 

 

There iso reason for a staff member to even use the word ban when commenting to members. The only reason it to threaten. Similar to a cop putting his hand on his firearm, he never draws it, but the warning is very clear.

 

 

 

 

Right, that is why Wez is still posting personal attacks all over the place, your doing a great job, lol.

 

 

I never lied about anything, you were tossing words like banning in my direction and I called you on it, you later said you never meant anythign about it but I still say there was no reason to bring it up unless you were making threats.

 

I have no problem talking to you in private but public or private the only thing that matters to me is you to get Wez under control and none of this is even necessary. Wez is the common factor to 99% of the problems on this forum, but your spending most of your time on me with what you have already admitted was your wrong assumption.

 

 

 

 

I don't care what other people think, I guess you do.

 

I run a couple forums myself and doing my job to keep the peace is all I worry about. Maybe you should stop trying to make friends and do something about the Wez problem instead.

 

 

 

 

Going overboard on me for a wrong assumption on your part is not moderating, dealing with Wez is.

 

Take care of Wez, and the rest will fall into place.

 

 

 

As pointed out by eddo, Wez made the first personal attack, so will you give me an appology for wrongsly accusing me of making the first personal attack?

 

 

The only way you can make Wez's comment innocent, is to twist it around, why is it he gets so much understand from you while you go out of your way to bash me?

 

 

Look, I "responded" to Wez, Wez is the problem, deal with it or not as your choice, but stop blaming me for "responding".

 

Nice projection but if this is at all true. It's strange that this post was made.

 

Not an attack on you but

 

 

 

I didn't see anyones possition attacked in the comment you quoted other then Bush being called a liberal for giving away money.

 

I agree. There is money going to people in the form of "tax refunds" and "rebates" that exceeds what they paid in for taxes. That is neither a refund or a rebate. Lets call a spade a spade. It's either a handout at that point or welfare.

 

That's liberal crap and being pushed by an alleged conservative President. Ergo Bush is acting as a liberal.

 

 

 

So are are we not supposed to include quotes from other people to support our point any more? If so the entire thread on No Food For Fat People needs to be erased. That's all is on that thread.

 

 

 

Glad to see you are above personal attacks.

 

As far as editing you post unless you go back and completely change it to refute someones reply, I would much rather someone go in and edit their own spelling or whatever mistakes themselves then times when I have had to do it (and have done so for several members) to make sure the message is brought across as it was intended and some noob with an empty arsonal (and a few forum veterans) begin the whole spelling and grammar police crap.

 

The childish crap has to stop or this thread will dissappear, just like Abortion Smoothie. Before anyone blames anyone, we all know it often starts with Wez (you know it's true and we had an agreement) but this time it wasn't him.

 

 

 

Here is where wez jumped in on the tread before it got out of hand.

 

 

 

He appeared to be agreeing with you about decreasing Federal social programs.

 

Even Brotherman was civil enough to ask about the interpretation.

 

 

 

I may be wrong and Old Salt may be wrong but I assumed he meant the Libertarian party.

 

Then you decided to take the low road this time, and I know you usually don't but you did with this response to Brotherman and talking about wez.

 

 

 

It seems everyone needs to take a step back and regroup to a civil debate.

 

(Pardon my quoting of others if that bothers you but I probably will still quote others on this board and politcal and public figures from time to time. I would also like to appologize for my lack of proofreading. I'm at work and in a hurry)

 

I gotta agree with IWS on this.

 

Sorry. I have enough real friends. I don't need to pump up wez or anyone else to make friends here.

[timesjoke]

Wez already admitted to him meaning to call me a liberal, not a liberatarian.

 

So your assumption was wrong, now what?

[wez]

Wez already admitted to him meaning to call me a liberal, not a liberatarian.

 

So your assumption was wrong, now what?

 

TJ, YOU HAVE BEEN CALLING ME A LIBERAL FOR 6 MONTHS. I HAVE NEVER CALLED ANYONE A LIBERAL IN MY LIFE.

 

 

I told you I agreed with you, then said.. welcome to the liberal party, in jest, and you proceed to have a meltdown for 2 days. WAKE UP!

 

 

So what you are saying is, I should have flew off the handle at you personally attacking me with the liberal label, just like you? Then who owes who a f cking apology?

 

WAKE UP!

[timesjoke]

Well, appears we agree on this point TJ... welcome to Liberal party...

 

You called me a liberal, so you just lied again.

 

You made the first personal attack and IWS crawled my behind for it.

 

 

You will never change Wez, your a well poisoner.

[ImWithStupid]

You called me a liberal, so you just lied again.

 

You made the first personal attack and IWS crawled my behind for it.

 

 

You will never change Wez, your a well poisoner.

 

THE POINT IS WHY CAN YOU CLAIM TITLE TO ANYONE ELSE AND IT'S FINE BUT NOBODY CAN INSINUTATE YOU ARE SOMETHING YOU ARE NOT?

[timesjoke]

THE POINT IS WHY CAN YOU CLAIM TITLE TO ANYONE ELSE AND IT'S FINE BUT NOBODY CAN INSINUTATE YOU ARE SOMETHING YOU ARE NOT?

 

Your not making any sense.

 

First of all, based on topics discussed on this forum to date, I am clearly a conservative. your mostly a conservative with tiny liberal leanings, Brotherman is more conservative then I am, eddo is a conservative, anna is a liberal, wez is a liberal.

 

This is based on observations on topics covered in my opinion.

 

Now we are not allowed to have opinions?

 

It seems to me you feel it is okay for Wez to call people things their not, but if I call them what they are, somehow I am wrong..............

 

 

Forgive me but I do not understand where your going.

 

 

Either way, I am the only one who has been blasted by you to later find out your 100% wrong on your "assumption". Your a moderator, your not supposed to be flying off the handle like this.