Maher Mods are trolling this board!

[EvilMonkey]

Originally Posted by wayside

OK...I get the smiley at the end of you post. Let me just make certain I understand the rules...after all it is your site, they're your rules. Twice now I have asked you for examples of statements that you attributed to me and twice no you have refused. You have also termed me "paranoid" and when pressed for a reason you refused to cite one. Then you provide your analysis of my problem with authority. My question concerning rules is this. Am I allowed to give it back to you in kind? Am I allowed to make statements concerning words and thoughts that I attribute to you and then not provide evidence of that attribution? Am I allowed to say that you are paranoid, or in the throws of any other mental ailment, without fear of some form of official sanction? Or is this a one way street? I'm just asking for clarification.

Certainly you may provide feedback, everyone may.

You have also termed me "paranoid" and when pressed for a reason you refused to cite one.

^ This is a perfect example If you don't see it, then you don't see it. Consider it my opinion, no harm done.

As for the rules, you want a granular explanation for every single word posted on this site and I simply don't have the time, especially when you are the only one ever asking for it.

[wayside]

Originally Posted by ericgtr

Certainly you may provide feedback, everyone may.

OK, but I don't see "feedback" equal to "inaccurate attributions." Maybe you do and that's what's causing the difference of opinion.

Originally Posted by ericgtr

^ This is a perfect example If you don't see it, then you don't see it. Consider it my opinion, no harm done.

I disagree. You are the one who declared personal insults off base yet your calling me "paranoid" is not considered insulting. How do you figure?

Originally Posted by ericgtr

As for the rules, you want a granular explanation for every single word posted on this site and I simply don't have the time, especially when you are the only one ever asking for it.

What a massive cop out. You term me "paranoid" I ask you for an example and you call that a want for "granular explanation for every single word posted on this site." What a load of horsecrap. You were asked about a specific word in a specific posting. As long as we're both allowed freedom of expression when referencing the others statements, I find that paricular form of reply simply chickenshit. You made a statement about me and then when pressed on it you fell back on this whole "granular" bull. If you want to call someone names have the stones to back it up. No harm done?

[Refuge51]

Originally Posted by zimmy61

Is that an offer?

I said "make love" not "I want to make love"

[EvilMonkey]

Originally Posted by wayside

OK, but I don't see "feedback" equal to "inaccurate attributions." Maybe you do and that's what's causing the difference of opinion.

I disagree. You are the one who declared personal insults off base yet your calling me "paranoid" is not considered insulting. How do you figure?

What a massive cop out. You term me "paranoid" I ask you for an example and you call that a want for "granular explanation for every single word posted on this site." What a load of horsecrap. You were asked about a specific word in a specific posting. As long as we're both allowed freedom of expression when referencing the others statements, I find that paricular form of reply simply chickenshit. You made a statement about me and then when pressed on it you fell back on this whole "granular" bull. If you want to call someone names have the stones to back it up. No harm done?

If I answered every one of your define the rules for "this" and "that" I would be here all day long just to cater to you so it's not going to happen, get over it. Use your judgement, everyone else seems pretty capable of it, I am sure you can manage too.

I find that paricular form of reply simply chickenshit

Cool, thanks for the opinion.

[Refuge51]

Originally Posted by wayside

You and me will sit around the shack, smoke a bong of Fruitloops, and read the funny papers.

Okay, because we both could use a break.

[wayside]

Originally Posted by ericgtr

If I answered every one of your define the rules for "this" and "that" I would be here all day long just to cater to you so it's not going to happen, get over it. Use your judgement, everyone else seems pretty capable of it, I am sure you can manage too.

Smooth dodge. You're good.

Originally Posted by ericgtr

Cool, thanks for the opinion.

No problem. You know where to look if you need one.

[wayside]

Originally Posted by Refuge51

Okay, because we both could use a break.

C'mon...let's go...I'm outta this thread.

[EvilMonkey]

Originally Posted by wayside

C'mon...let's go...I'm outta this thread.

Smooth dodge. You're good.

Not a dodge, just the fact that you have the inability to have your own judgment on anything and feel you must have outlined rules for every fucking work you say on here. Get a nanny to help you out.

[wayside]

Originally Posted by ericgtr

Not a dodge, just the fact that you have the inability to have your own judgment on anything and feel you must have outlined rules for every fucking work you say on here. Get a nanny to help you out.

And you have the inability to understand that if you make statements about or towards someone you should be able to back them up. Who the fuck is asking you for rules on that? You made statements about me saying things about moderators, I asked you to show them to me - nothing. You said I accused Teri of attacking me, I asked you to show me where - nothing. You called me paranoid, I asked you to show me an example - nothing. What the fuck does that have to do with rules? Should we assume that everything you post is based on the same - nothing? I would like to think there is a fact in there somewhere...hell it makes it more sporting.

[EvilMonkey]

Originally Posted by wayside

And you have the inability to understand that if you make statements about or towards someone you should be able to back them up. Who the fuck is asking you for rules on that? You made statements about me saying things about moderators, I asked you to show them to me - nothing. You said I accused Teri of attacking me, I asked you to show me where - nothing. You called me paranoid, I asked you to show me an example - nothing. What the fuck does that have to do with rules? Should we assume that everything you post is based on the same - nothing? I would like to think there is a fact in there somewhere...hell it makes it more sporting.

I have pointed out this thread which is all you need to see but you obviously don't see which leads us back around and around in this thread which is getting us nowhere. Time to drop this in here, I mean it, just move on.