Jump to content
  • Sign up for free and receive a month's subscription

    You are viewing this page as a guest. That means you are either a member who has not logged in, or you have not yet registered with us. Signing up for an account only takes a minute and it means you will no longer see this annoying box! It will also allow you to get involved with our friendly(ish!) community and take part in the discussions on our forums. And because we're feeling generous, if you sign up for a free account we will give you a month's free trial access to our subscriber only content with no obligation to commit. Register an account and then send a private message to @dave u and he'll hook you up with a subscription.

Top Ten Conspiracy Theories


Plewggs
 Share

Recommended Posts

Stronts has never knowingly killed a baby (as far as I am aware)*

 

Stonts told me to go and kill myself, but I didn't rise to it. Yes I possibly used an insulting term to him first, but I think he took it to a different level. I thought for the sake of the boards I would let it lie, but he has a little snipe all the time now and thinks that because I "started it" he has got carte blanche to say whatever the fuck he likes to me, and to anybody else he deems to have "started it".

 

What Stronts doesn't seem to realise is that being patronising, condescending, supercilious and offering implied insults, is just as offensive as calling people names. Yesterday for example, we were all debating/disagreeing in relative peace, only for SD to butt in and imply that I was lying, when I had stated a factual inaccuracy. Questioning my integrity pisses me off far more than telling me to go and kill myself. 

 

 

 

*he probably has though

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stronts has never knowingly killed a baby (as far as I am aware)*

 

Stonts told me to go and kill myself, but I didn't rise to it. Yes I possibly used an insulting term to him first, but I think he took it to a different level. I thought for the sake of the boards I would let it lie, but he has a little snipe all the time now and thinks that because I "started it" he has got carte blanche to say whatever the fuck he likes to me, and to anybody else he deems to have "started it".

 

What Stronts doesn't seem to realise is that being patronising, condescending, supercilious and offering implied insults, is just as offensive as calling people names. Yesterday for example, we were all debating/disagreeing in relative peace, only for SD to butt in and imply that I was lying, when I had stated a factual inaccuracy. Questioning my integrity pisses me off far more than telling me to go and kill myself. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*he probably has though

You were offended by someone you've never met, who you'll never meet and don't like. On the internet. Christ.

 

Just ignore him if he gets on your nerves, like you would in the real world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Stonts told me to go and kill myself

 

If he really has gone to that point, fair enough, I'll just stay out of it. I'm not hating any of you though, I just think that going that far is retarded. Especially on the internet. (where many of us go over the top from the off.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yesterday for example, we were all debating/disagreeing in relative peace, only for SD to butt in and imply that I was lying, when I had stated a factual inaccuracy.

Just wanted to add that I noticed that too and thought it was OTT, before I saw your post. (For the sake of balance!)

 

I wasn't implying that you were retarded more than others either in my last post, I just meant the whole load of arguments of late when they've gone to extremes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stonts told me to go and kill myself, but I didn't rise to it. Yes I possibly used an insulting term to him first, but I think he took it to a different level. I thought for the sake of the boards I would let it lie, but he has a little snipe all the time now and thinks that because I "started it" he has got carte blanche to say whatever the fuck he likes to me, and to anybody else he deems to have "started it".

 

The lesson is: don't start it.

 

What Stronts doesn't seem to realise is that being patronising, condescending, supercilious and offering implied insults, is just as offensive as calling people names. Yesterday for example, we were all debating/disagreeing in relative peace, only for SD to butt in and imply that I was lying, when I had stated a factual inaccuracy. Questioning my integrity pisses me off far more than telling me to go and kill myself.

 

I don't know where the implication that you are lying is in "facts are awfully inconvenient". I was accusing you of being wrong, not of being deliberately dishonest.

 

And, incidentally, these are some of the previous exchanges in the "discussion" that was oh so peaceful before I cam along with my, er, implications.

 

Arl arse implying that non-conspiracy theorists are insane:

 

We'll said Ginny, some sanity at last.

 

Arl arse calling people ignorant:

 

Oh I read it in full, you just ignore the evidence time after time, that's beautiful because it shows you for exactly what you are.

 

Ditto:

 

You actually know fuck all about 9/11 do you, go do some reading & educate yourself.

 

Again for good luck:

 

Shoulda carried on learning little man.

 

Relentless, this:

 

Or just taking you head outa your arse might be a good start.

 

Outright abuse:

 

If he knows his job, he knows what he's looking for. It's called experience you pompous cunt.

 

Ditto:

 

When you've worked in construction for 25 years then I might come to you for some insight, until then your just another know nothing internet bell-end.

This isn't a comprehensive round-up, but I think you get the gist.

 

Now, does anyone want to guess how many times Spy Bee pulled Arl arse up for his behaviour in his noble quest for an adult discussion?

 

But apparently, it was me who brought the tone down by saying "facts are awfully inconvenient".

 

Yo, anyone seen any double standards lately?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The lesson is: don't start it. I don't know where the implication that you are lying is in "facts are awfully inconvenient". I was accusing you of being wrong, not of being deliberately dishonest.And, incidentally, these are some of the previous exchanges in the "discussion" that was oh so peaceful before I cam along with my, er, implications.Arl arse implying that non-conspiracy theorists are insane: Arl arse calling people ignorant: Ditto: Again for good luck: Relentless, this: Outright abuse: Ditto: This isn't a comprehensive round-up, but I think you get the gist.Now, does anyone want to guess how many times Spy Bee pulled Arl arse up for his behaviour in his noble quest for an adult discussion?But apparently, it was me who brought the tone down by saying "facts are awfully inconvenient".Yo, anyone seen any double standards lately?

Get over yourself, little girl.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...