Question for RockHard

[Guest TNT Ted]

RH, would you mind telling us just what your beef with MER is? I've been registered on this site for about nine months, but I don't follow on a day-to-day basis all the drama that goes on. I'm also registered at MER, and I certainly don't think I'm congregating with "rejects" (your words).

 

In any case, why do you continue to bash MER? I gotta believe there are a lot of others that are wondering the same thing. Enlighten us, will you?

[RockHard]

I don't agree with your "bashing" characterization and I would appreciate you placing something in your mouth instead of trying to place incorrect thoughts, feelings and characterizations into mine.

 

If the comment "congregating with 'rejects'" went over your head or, didn't apply to you (the "rejects" know who they are), then I suggest you ignore the comment. Unless, of course, you're one of those low-esteem queers who take every comment on an anonymous internet forum personally. If this is the case then I can't help you.

 

Was that enlightening enough, Ted?

[Guest alanm]

RockHard posted more than once that he objected to other business interests of the owners of MER.

[Guest TNT Ted]

Sorry, maybe "bashing" is too strong a word, but it's certainly apparent that you have no use for the MER site or it's supporters. I was merely trying to understand why.

 

Frankly, your reply wasn't the least bit enlightening. But considering the unpleasant nature of it, I no longer care to have an answer.

[RockHard]

RE: Answer for Ted.

 

"Sorry, maybe "bashing" is too strong a word, but it's certainly apparent that you have no use for the MER site or it's supporters."

 

Certainly this sentence is more truthful with much less presumption. There's just one caveat: "or it's (shouldn't be a contraction) supporters" should read "several of its supporters." I'm sure some guys who decide to join that site are nice guys but the majority who post on MER's forum are M4M rejects, and I have no desire to socialize with ill-mannered, hate-filled posters who were once members here before they were shown the door. I choose my parties and online interests with care.

 

I also refuse to support someone who makes a living by promoting gay bareback sex, knowingly. If Oz presented his MER site differently, at the beginning, I may have considered giving it a second look. That is, until I saw the roster of usernames the place immediately attracted. You see, Ted, you can change the window-dressing all you want but that doesn't mean the contents of the house don't SUCK.

 

And, me unpleasant? Never happen, unless you're a lawyer trying to fuck my ass without grease. This is a fact: no matter what I write or how stinging it can read, I write with a smile on my face because I'm sincerely a happy guy. Don't label me nasty because I've aced the art of provocation and know how to punch a bully in the face.

 

Enjoy your weekend! :-)

[+ Charlie]

RE: Answer for Ted.

 

Huh? The tone of your first response to TNT Ted--whom I don't know--was as obnoxious and insulting as anything I've ever seen here to an apparently sincere question. I am not registered at MER and have looked at it only once in the past few months, but several of the main participants there, whom I do know personally, are hardly "rejects" from here: they moved there voluntarily because of dissatisfaction--merited or not--with this website. And Barry serves as a monitor at both sites.

[RockHard]

RE: Response to Charlie.

 

"The tone of your first response to TNT Ted--whom I don't know--was as obnoxious and insulting as anything I've ever seen here to an apparently sincere question."

 

Well, "apparently," that's your (rather dramatic) opinion and you're entitled to your opinion. However, if you look hard enough, I'm sure you could easily find other posts far more "obnoxious and insulting" than anything I've written here. Also, your (histrionic) opinion doesn't change my sincere reaction to Ted's poorly worded question, it doesn't change how I was feeling when I wrote the response and it doesn't change who I am as a person.

 

Furthermore, an "apparently sincere question" does not mean the question is automatically a kind or thoughtful question. As far as I'm concerned, any question that is filled with presumption and places false words into someone else's mouth is insulting and obnoxious. So, in my mind, Ted started the tone. Had Ted asked his question in a manner befitting a gentleman, I would have treated him with the same respect he showed me.

 

In other words, you often get what you give (just ask Tom Isern), and I know how to give back a hundred-fold, be it kindness or a biatch-fest.

 

Ted apologized (with one foot in) and I reciprocated with a very sincere, "Enjoy your weekend!"

 

RE: rejects — as I've already stated, "the rejects know who they are." I will not list them by username no matter who begs.

[+ Charlie]

RE: Response to Charlie.

 

Can you explain what is "dramatic" about "apparently sincere," and "histrionic" about my opinion? You seem to be quicker with adjectives than with explanations.

[RockHard]

RE: Response to Charlie.

 

Good God, Charlie, you can't be that dense.

 

"Rather dramatic" and "histrionic" were both describing your opinion, and it was your opinion that "the tone of your (my) first response to TNT Ted was as obnoxious and insulting as anything I've ever seen here."

 

Honestly, with all the obnoxious assholes who have been posting here through the years, my response to Ted takes the #1-Most-Obnoxious-Reply award?

 

Charlie, give me a fucking break and find something more fun to do with your time. (I hear MER has a forum.)

 

ps Can anybody guess who's with me now (and doesn't know it's me)? :-)

[flguy]

Tom Isern??????

[+ Charlie]

RE: Response to Charlie.

 

Try reading your initial response to TNT Ted as though it were written to you; if you don't feel that you have been slapped down for presuming to question someone, then you are tone-deaf. But you are right: it certainly is not the most obnoxious and insulting response I've ever read here--a couple of your predecessors were a lot less controlled when they felt they had been criticized in any way.

[RockHard]

RE: Response to Charlie.

 

"Try reading your initial response to TNT Ted as though it were written to you"

 

And there lies my point, Charlie. I don't ask presumptuous questions of anonymous posters and I try my best to never put my thoughts and feelings into other people's mouths (just my cock). I would have posed the question differently than Ted did.

 

Forgive me for aborting Newton's Third Law of Motion, Charlie, but every action creates an equal or opposite reaction, and any gay man who behaves like a gentleman will always make my dick hard (and my wallet empty, especially if he's a sexy escort).

 

For anyone who follows my posts carefully, I do my best to choose my words with care, especially when I'm defending myself from someone else's rude and obnoxious behavior. I'm not suggesting that Ted bent me completely out of shape with his question and I'm far from perfect. I could always be softer. However, I WILL NOT hesitate to sincerely apologize if I've been wrong and I'll apologize fully without a juvenile hissy-fit accompanying my apology. (Granted, it's hard to be wrong when all you're doing is expressing an opinion. But it sure is easy to be rude and obnoxious with your opinion and I certainly know how to dish it back when I feel it's necessary.) :-)

 

Contrary to what others may think, I enjoy criticism. This is one quality I swear has helped me be a successful businessman. But your criticism better be smart or I'll hammer you into the ground until there's nothing left. Or, I'll ignore you.

 

"Tom Isern??????"

 

I'm not a fan of six question marks, flguy, but in this case it makes sense.

 

Is she dead yet? Has she gone the path of Rico-Lucky and followed the light? I sure hope her bodybag was Prada. I imagine Prada looked good on her (as long as she wore a muzzle).