Evolution

[Guest mbarz]

RE: Woodlution

 

>I think all that anyody is asking is to cut the personal

>insults and lower the tone around here. It is hard to do when

>guys draped in the Confederate flag prance around whining

>about how they are being mistreated. When one goes to

>escortjab, just about every thread brims with insults. So

>maybe the rebels should just stay there.

>

>But they can't. Even joel is back, along with taylor, mbarez,

>and BofN. No one reads them over there, so they come back here

>to get attention. I haven't posted over there since Doug shot

>his load watching that head shatter.

>

>Ultimately though, we are all here for reasons of our own. One

>thing woddie and I have in common is that we post for our own

>entertainment. And I have learned to ignore certain people.

 

 

Thank you Lucky for giving us a fine example of hypocrisy. In the first paragraph, you call for people to cut personal insults and lower the tone. Then in the second paragraph you insult taylor, Beware of Nick, Joel, and me and the best part, you can't see what is so glaringly obvious to everyone else.

 

I sincerely believe Woodlawn post for his own entertainment and I believe just as strongly that you don't. You care very much what the other posters here think of you, it shows in every post you write. You don't ignore anything, if you did you wouldn't need to copy and paste other people's post to make your point.

 

So tell us Lucky, which way do you want it, do you really want to follow the rules or do you want to continue to mock them?

[jackhammer91406]

RE: Mirror

 

>

>I simply cannot let such a dishonest statement pass.

I believe you

>deliberately employed these locutions to denigrate the people

>with whom you disagree and I don't believe there is anyone who

>read your post who did not get that from it. I'm sorry you

>are not honest enough to admit it.

 

I love it that when someone does the EXACT same thing as you, they are somehow being dishonest. You can often be seen offering pontifications of someone elses character and morals, however you don't see that as condescending or superior? If you want me to be honest or look in a mirror, I'll happily join you at the reflection desk. We can gaze into the mirror together and bond...

 

and for the record, the pronoun used in the barnyard animals reference was WE, not THEY

 

 

 

>

>I have no desire or intention to win anyone on this board over

>to my opinions. If anyone takes the trouble to read my

>opinions, that is enough for me.

 

wow, that's impressively humble. score points for that.

 

>

>You are confusing the fact that I enjoy irony with a desire to

>act as the conscience of my readers. I plead guilty to the

>former, but not to the latter.

 

yeah, and that's why your enjoyment requires your comments. such noble and pure intent. It's hard NOT to want to emulate you

 

>

>I must reject your definition of freedom. If someone

>expresses the belief that God wants him to blow up a

>skyscraper in order to punish the people in it for being

>unbelievers, does that "have merit and be attractive enough to

>persuade?"

 

excuse me? and this is relevant to my statement how? I believe that my statement of freedom meant exactly what I said; that someone who shouts about blowing up a building is responsible for that, as in you can't yell fire in a theater unless there is a fire.

 

I think not, and yet expressing this belief is

>clearly protected by our concept of freedom of speech.

 

nope, Some things are not

>protected by freedom of speech

 

>As I said, you need to come to terms with the fact that there

>are people in this world who have values different from yours.

 

Oh, I think I have already come to terms with that, else I wouldn't be stating that I am frustrated and dismayed at that fact. DUH!

 

 

> The above statement, for example, seems based on your belief

>that tearing down others is always a bad thing. In my system

>of values, it is not.

 

I guess we already knew that, but thanks for restating the obvious fact just for the sake of argument

 

 

I have seen you be much crueler, so I am grateful.

>

>Don't mention it.

 

But I must, I am compelled by all that is holy and righteous, heheh. Besides, I am just so happy to have authored another hot topic. I don't think I have had one since my first Brasil trip }(

[raife]

Reflecting pool

 

I love your witty rejoinders, but you're doing the point-for-point rebuttal thing... I hope I've not been a bad influence.

Just so you're enjoying yourself, buddy... src=http://justusboys.com/forum/images/smilies/evil2.gif

Very cathartic thread BTW... now that we know where everybody stands this week, back to the sexy guys... src=http://justusboys.com/forum/images/smilie/sex.gif

[jackhammer91406]

RE: Reflecting pool

 

Yeah Raife,

As for the point/counter point thing, I was trying something new. But don't worry, you weren't being a bad influence. Gotta admit it was kinda fun, tho. I don't remember having a back and forth with Woodlawn as being THIS much fun. Guess maybe he taught me something after all without even trying? :7

[BewareofNick]

RE: Mirror

 

It's fascinating that you can't see the difference between you and woodlawn. You, BG, Tampa Yankee, One Finger, Conway and a few select others set yourself up as the moral arbiters of this site.

 

Many of you spent the first few weeks of the reopening cackling about civility and how awful the Mean Girls Club is..blah blah blah blah blah.

 

Then, several of you engaged in completely uncivilized and ungentlemanly behavior in defense of civility and gentlemanly behavior.

 

Even if woodlawn angages in the EXACT SAME behavior, YOU are the hypocrite and woodlawn is not because woodlawn never subscribed to the farcical notion of a gentleman's club.

 

You DO sit on high and you DO set yourself up as morally superior. That's not an opinion. It's a statement of fact based on your postings here. It's kind of like Fox "News" saying that it's fair and balanced. Everyone knows they're lying when they say it.

[OneFinger]

RE: Mirror

 

>It's fascinating that you can't see the difference between you and woodlawn. You, BG, Tampa Yankee, One Finger, Conway and a few select others set yourself up as the moral arbiters of this site.

 

Isn't that considered a personal attack?

 

I expect your apology or retraction IMMEDIATELY.

[woodlawn]

RE: Mirror

 

>I love it that when someone does the EXACT same thing as

>you, they are somehow being dishonest.

 

The dishonesty arises from the fact that you are unwilling to admit that you are denigrating someone else's character. I have never had a problem admitting that about my posts. I do it, and am honest about doing it. You are not.

 

 

> You can often be seen

>offering pontifications of someone elses character and

>morals, however you don't see that as condescending or

>superior?

 

See above answer.

 

> that someone who shouts about blowing up a building is

>responsible for that, as in you can't yell fire in a theater

>unless there is a fire.

 

You said that a statement must have the quality of being attractive or persuasive to be worthy of freedom of speech. That is not true. I don't know where you get your information about what sort of speech is protected by that doctrine in our society. I get mine from the judicial decisions defining freedom of speech, which I have read. And those decisions agree with me, not with you.

 

 

>nope, Some things are not

>>protected by freedom of speech

 

But the example I gave is protected. And so are the personal attacks you are complaining about.

 

>> The above statement, for example, seems based on your

>belief

>>that tearing down others is always a bad thing. In my

>system

>>of values, it is not.

 

>I guess we already knew that, but thanks for restating the

>obvious fact just for the sake of argument

 

This is what I mean when I say you have to come to terms with the fact that the values of others are different from yours. You started this thread in order to complain about behavior here that, in your value system, is 'wrong.' The only point I am making is that there are others in whose value system this behavior is not wrong, and you seem unwilling to acknowledge that. This dispute is not a dispute between people who want to abide by certain rules and people who don't. It is a dispute between people who have different sets of rules for their conduct. You want us to follow your rules. But we have our own.

[BewareofNick]

RE: Mirror

 

>>It's fascinating that you can't see the difference

>between you and woodlawn. You, BG, Tampa Yankee, One Finger,

>Conway and a few select others set yourself up as the moral

>arbiters of this site.

>

>Isn't that considered a personal attack?

>

>I expect your apology or retraction IMMEDIATELY.

 

I don't do requests. http://www.capitolmuseum.ca.gov/shared/images/legislature/governors/a_schwarzenegger.jpg

 

moral, adj.

 

1. Of or concerned with the judgment of the goodness or badness of human action and character: moral scrutiny; a moral quandary.

2. Teaching or exhibiting goodness or correctness of character and behavior: a moral lesson.

3. Conforming to standards of what is right or just in behavior; virtuous: a moral life.

4. Arising from conscience or the sense of right and wrong: a moral obligation.

5. Having psychological rather than physical or tangible effects: a moral victory; moral support.

6. Based on strong likelihood or firm conviction, rather than on the actual evidence: a moral certainty.

 

ar·bi·ter, n.

 

1. One chosen or appointed to judge or decide a disputed issue; an arbitrator.

2. One who has the power to judge or ordain at will: an arbiter of fashion. See Synonyms at judge.

 

Seems to me, that based on the definition of the words above, this could not be considered a personal attack by any reasonable person.

 

Thank you and drive through please.

[OneFinger]

RE: Mirror

 

This only shows your true colors.

 

I don't care if you don't do requests.

 

It wasn't a request. It was a DEMAND. IMHO you've broken the rules. It's not your place to define them to suit your personal needs.

[jackhammer91406]

RE: Mirror

 

> You want us to follow your rules.

 

Honestly Woodlawn, believe me when I say I want nothing of the sort. What I really want is for you and your friends to follow EACH OTHER out of the building. That would make me very happy, and you can take that honesty to the bank.

 

In absence of that, I guess we'll just have to keep playing with each other. If I am in denial, I am happy to continue if you are.

 

And BON, when Woodlawn needs your help, I am sure he will call for you, but thanks for playing our game.

 

This is fun...

:7

[BewareofNick]

RE: Mirror

 

>This only shows your true colors.

>

>I don't care if you don't do requests.

>

>It wasn't a request. It was a DEMAND. IMHO you've

>broken the rules. It's not your place to define them to suit

>your personal needs.

 

But it's yours? Thanks for proving my point. I don't do demand either.

[Guest 2004]

RE: Mirror

 

>This only shows your true colors.

>

>I don't care if you don't do requests.

>

>It wasn't a request. It was a DEMAND. IMHO you've

>broken the rules. It's not your place to define them to suit

>your personal needs.

>

>

 

Who are you to demand anything? First BoN post was in reply to Jackhammer. Second have you taken over being the bouncer at the door post now that Conway has left us? Has daddy approved your new (what appears to be) self appointed position?

 

I suggest (not demand) that you owe BoN an apology. You have been gunning for him ever since his return and continue to do so under the cover of being part of this gentlemen's club. Shame on you!

 

---/

Too often history will judge me.

[OneFinger]

RE: Mirror

 

Apology ain't comming.

 

Go attack someone else.

[Guest 2004]

RE: Mirror

 

>Apology ain't comming.

>

>Go attack someone else.

 

I am not attcking you. I am pointing out a fact. You created this issue and I as a member of this message center have a right to try and correct you in an appropriate means.

 

My suggestion for you to apologize to BoN is just that. It is clearly up to you to determine what your future here will be and those in authority will make the final decision based on your actions.

 

From your continued cyberstalking of BoN on this web site it is clear, I believe, to most that you are trying to have him once again evicted for your own pleasure. I find that behaviour very scary.

 

---/

So with one orbit of the earth I became a has been, but I shall sine again, give me time as that is what I was to you.

[OneFinger]

RE: Mirror

 

What don't you understand about AIN'T HAPPENING?

[jackhammer91406]

RE: Woodlution

 

and the best part,

>you can't see what is so glaringly obvious to everyone else.

 

 

What can't we see? That we are doing the same thing as you but with more class and wit?...I'm just asking...

[Guest mbarz]

RE: Woodlution

 

>and the best part,

>>you can't see what is so glaringly obvious to everyone else.

>

>

> What can't we see? That we are doing the same thing as

>you but with more class and wit?...I'm just asking...

>

 

That you're a bunch of hypocrites and there's nothing classy or witty about you...I'm just saying...

[raife]

M-I-C-K-E-Y...M-O-U-S-E

 

Is it just me Jack, or are you also getting the distinct impression there's but a single theme coming from that general direction? D-flat-minor blues, I think...

 

Dah Dah Dah Dah Dah Dah Dah Dah Dah (or something like that). src=http://radioparadise.com/modules/Forums/images/smiles/eusa_whistle.gif

 

.... _.__ .--. --- -.-. .-. .. - .

(ok - yea I confess - 420 before bedtime - my bad - so sue me!)

[jackhammer91406]

REflections

 

raife,

You caught that too? He got the party line down pretty fast, huh?

 

This new guy hasn't been here but a month, and so it's hard to say whether his contributions will ever amount to anything more than shouting at Hypos. But, hey, if he still forces himself to come over to a place he so obviously dislikes, to play with other kids he has so much contempt for, I guess we better keep the welcome wagon open.

 

Funny how mirrors only reflect what's in them, but not everyone sees the same thing. I can handle it if that makes me a hypocrite. But as far as I can tell, I am just exercising my rights of free speech, just like everyone else. The ailment of hypocrisy is apparently contagious. The medicine is the same, and so is the cure

 

If you want consistency, go see Martha Stewart.

[woodlawn]

RE: Mirror

 

>> You want us to follow your rules.

>

> Honestly Woodlawn, believe me when I say I want nothing

>of the sort. What I really want is for you and your friends

>to follow EACH OTHER out of the building. That would make me

>very happy, and you can take that honesty to the bank.

 

I sympathize with your point of view. I sympathize because I would like you and your fellow self-appointed arbiters of civility to leave as well. Gay men already have such a burden of distrust and contempt to bear in this country. The hypocrisy of people like you simply makes the situation worse for all of us.

 

>If I am in denial, I am happy to continue if

>you are.

 

I have never denied that some of my posts constitute personal attacks on other posters. You and the other self-appointed judges have offered some very unconvincing denials about the personal attacks you engage in, but I don't think anyone has been persuaded.

 

>And BON, when Woodlawn needs your help, I am sure he will call

>for you, but thanks for playing our game.

>

 

BoN is welcome to join in any conversation of which I am a part whether you approve of his participation or not. He has contributed far more useful information to this message board than you ever have. Your contributions have consisted mostly of long and exceedingly boring essays on your emotional problems. Why you think anyone would be interested in that subject is one of the enduring mysteries of this site.

[jackhammer91406]

RE: Mirror

 

>

>I have never denied that some of my posts constitute personal

>attacks on other posters.

 

well, see? We agree on something after all

 

 

Your contributions have consisted mostly

>of long and exceedingly boring essays on your emotional

>problems. Why you think anyone would be interested in that

>subject is one of the enduring mysteries of this site.

 

aahh, pulling out that old chestnut again? My, my, you must really be desperate, to go back to that old slam. Ouch, that hurts, really hurts. heheh

 

If you aren't interested in my mental health, why do you keep reading my boring posts, Huh? I just wanna play like you taught me. And like you, I don't care if you or anyone reads them, they are for me alone (oh wait, I must have stolen that thought from someone else)

 

Anyway, nice to see you this morning. have a great day..Nuyuk nuyuk.

 

[woodlawn]

RE: Mirror

 

> Your contributions have consisted mostly

>>of long and exceedingly boring essays on your emotional

>>problems. Why you think anyone would be interested in that

>>subject is one of the enduring mysteries of this site.

 

>aahh, pulling out that old chestnut again? My, my, you

>must really be desperate, to go back to that old slam. Ouch,

>that hurts, really hurts. heheh

 

I'm not trying to hurt you. I'm simply reminding you that between you and BoN, his contributions to this site have been vastly more useful than yours. There's no reason for you to feel hurt by that. But if you have a shred of humility in your character, you should feel that it is not your place to tell him when to post and when not to.

 

> If you aren't interested in my mental health, why do you keep

>reading my boring posts, Huh?

 

I don't. I stopped at the point at which I could no longer endure the long, lugubrious descriptions of the events of a not terribly interesting life.

 

>Anyway, nice to see you this morning. have a great day..Nuyuk

> nuyuk.

 

I think the point has been sufficiently made by me and others that you and your fellow self-appointed arbiters of civility have engaged in plenty of personal attacks yourselves, and thus have no business rebuking anyone for that sort of thing. This is a point I will be glad to repeat whenever you take it upon yourselves to lecture the rest of us on this subject again. As a (former) thespian, I am sure you will appreciate the following quote from Moliere:

 

"You should leave the sins of others alone,

Until you've made some progress with your own."

[BewareofNick]

RE: REflections

 

Well, if the stated goal of this site is to create a gentleman's club, how do those who have stated this goal hope to accomplish it? Certainly all the efforts thus far have failed.

 

Doesn't it start by acting like a gentleman? If so, then when will the proponents of the club start acting like gentlemen?

[jackhammer91406]

Deep thoughts

 

My, we ARE crusty this morning. And a bit sanctimonious as well. Welcome to the club.

 

Feel free to correct my behavior all you want, as I certainly feel free to comment on yours. I don't think it has ever been an issue (at least not with me) as to whether there are offenders on both sides. Really, do you get that impression that someone is in denial about that? C'mon man. Get real. But there is a difference between saying there's a behavior that is unpleasant and calling someone a dickless cunt. That's just crap for crap's sake. But since there is now a place where people can say that stuff freely, why isn't that enough for you and your friends? I mean, really? Unless there is some issue that you have all resolved to destroy this site over? I mean it. What's so important about coming over here and ripping everything and everyone? And who appointed you guys as the demolition team anyway?

 

Personally I have enjoyed this back and forth with you more than any in the past because it has been kinda civil on both sides. I think that's what the point was in my original post. You no longer have any keys to make me feel bad. That's something you did for me. Kinda toughened me up a bit I guess.

 

Anyway, feel free to shout the one or two phrases that dwell on the Big H. Pretty soon, no one is gonna notice (if they haven't stopped already). Call me when you guys have some new material. I'll play along.

[jackhammer91406]

RE: REflections

 

No argument there BoN. I am up for a civil discussion of disagreements anytime. That's part of what a gentleman does; Address differences in a civil manner. But shouting hypocrite at every poster and post doesn't advance the discussion much, does it?

 

I always thought of you as our resident consumer protector. I have no beef with you other than the repetitive nature of the party line about hypocrisy. That's kind of tired and needs a freshening.

 

But hey, we have all at one time or another responded to a goad and crawled down in the gutter to play nasty. Is that what you wanted to hear? If so, I have no problem saying that. But don't you think it would happen less often if everyone tried to be civil instead of ripping and shredding. I mean, talk about gay stereotypes. Can someone say MEOW?

 

My take on gay life is that it's tough enough fighting off the perceptions of the ultra-conservative str8 world. I don't want to have to watch my back too. I am hoping my gay brothers and sisters have that.

Yet in this small microcosm of gay life, we see people coming in here day after day tearing into someone over any and everything. Just to do it, not for any other reason. It's like watching some animal eat her young.

 

That's all I'm saying..