What the FUCK is wrong with LoneStar?

[ValleyDwellerNorth]

Far be it for me to ever criticize the content of a poster's message. Blather, at times, is my middle name. However, are there any safe guards in the message center for asstards? He/she/it joined today, is now close to 80 posts, and all freakzilla did was bump posts around and added NOTHING CONSIDERABLE to each and every post! Is it considered hijacking when the poster in question is in such desperate need of attention or a hug? I often wonder if such people, similar to those people that cause computer viruses, were touched in a bad way by their uncle? Were they left out of the kickball tournament at school? Did someone add genitals to their snowman as a child?

 

With all the question posting of late (who is Dallas Observer, who is Lucky, who shot J.R.) I need to post a few ?s now:

 

Who is Lone Star?

Isn't his quote/signature stupid?

Is he nice or is his purpose here malicious?

Does Texas know about this?

 

RISE UP CITIZENS OF HOO! Don't sit back and allow this re-zoning of the message center. Fight stupid. Battle stupid. OUTLAW STUPID!

 

Peace!

VDN

[JT Brooklyn]

VDN. All I can say is Good Question. But the odds on a justifiable answer in our lifetime..Doubt It! :+

[jackhammer91406]

Stirring

 

This guy is a pot stirrer but has ended being a pot sticker.

 

Someone pry him loose and send him back to the whiners site.

[woodlawn]

>Far be it for me to ever criticize the content of a poster's

>message.

 

Apparently it isn't far at all, since that is exactly what you're doing here.

 

> Blather, at times, is my middle name.

 

It certainly is. That's why it seems so odd to me that you create an entire thread for the sole purpose of criticizing someone else for doing the EXACT SAME THING you have done on many occasions.

 

> Is it considered

>hijacking when the poster in question is in such desperate

>need of attention or a hug? I often wonder if such people,

>similar to those people that cause computer viruses, were

>touched in a bad way by their uncle? Were they left out of

>the kickball tournament at school? Did someone add genitals

>to their snowman as a child?

 

If you think such childhood traumas are responsible for a tendency to hijack threads, perhaps you should ask Rick Munroe. So far as I know he is the reigning champion when it comes to inserting in a thread a post that has absolutely nothing to do with the subject being discussed and has no purpose whatsoever except to draw attention to himself. In fact, he once created a thread entitled "Hijacking Threads is Good and Natural." He's been doing that sort of thing one hell of a lot longer than the poster you're complaining about, and yet for some odd reason you've never objected. Why would that be?

[ValleyDwellerNorth]

>>Far be it for me to ever criticize the content of a

>poster's

>>message.

>

>Apparently it isn't far at all, since that is exactly what

>you're doing here.

 

It's obvious we are both fisters Mr. Woodlawn. I tend to use manners when I fist. I announce my entry. You, on the other "hand", just shove it in. I am not so provincial. Since it is out of my good-natured character to be so critical that is why I gave a mini-preface. I am only drawn out of my giving, loving way of life when my e-space becomes polluted and cluttered.

 

>> Blather, at times, is my middle name.

>

>It certainly is. That's why it seems so odd to me that you

>create an entire thread for the sole purpose of criticizing

>someone else for doing the EXACT SAME THING you have done on

>many occasions.

 

I think most things in life should be self-contained. If I spent the time going all over the message center expressing my view on On-Star's haphazard posting I would be guilty of the same rudeness he is. This thread was made to respond to his multiple incursions of ramped stupidity.

 

>Good and Natural." He's been doing that sort of thing one

>hell of a lot longer than the poster you're complaining about,

>and yet for some odd reason you've never objected. Why would

>that be?

 

The difference between Mr. Munroe and boner-star is that Rick is established here. Much like with you and many other posters who have been here for a while, we can predict reactions, statements, etc. There is a certain theme that builds over time with posts from me, you, Rick and others. Lone Star acted like a child trying to find a place in adult conversations. He does not know his place, he is a virtual stranger with no introduction and he is obviously someone who is here already with a new handle wanting to cause trouble.

 

And why would "it be" that I never complained about Rick doing the same thing Lone Star is doing? I never had a reason to complain. Rick has never turned the lounge upside down with one night of constant frivolous posting. Rick is sincere and he is not here with malicious intent. Lone Star is here with malicious intent.

 

Lone Star is lucky to have you as a friend defending him.

[woodlawn]

>>>Far be it for me to ever criticize the content of a

>>poster's

>>>message.

>>

>>Apparently it isn't far at all, since that is exactly what

>>you're doing here.

>

>It's obvious we are both fisters Mr. Woodlawn. I tend to use

>manners when I fist.

 

Again, your "manners," whatever they may be, obviously do not prevent you from starting an entire thread for no other purpose than to criticize someone else for doing the exact same thing that you have done on other occasions. Some manners.

 

>I think most things in life should be self-contained.

 

Then please try to apply that principle to all the blather you post here, and you will be in no danger of hypocrisy when you complain about the blather of others.

 

>>Good and Natural." He's been doing that sort of thing one

>>hell of a lot longer than the poster you're complaining

>about,

>>and yet for some odd reason you've never objected. Why

>would

>>that be?

 

>The difference between Mr. Munroe and boner-star is that Rick

>is established here.

 

In other words, he's done the thing you object to -- hijacking -- much more often than the other guy, so that makes it okay. Thanks for clearing that up.

 

>Lone Star acted like a child trying to find a place in adult

>conversations. He does not know his place, he is a virtual

>stranger with no introduction and he is obviously someone who

>is here already with a new handle wanting to cause trouble.

 

"He does not know his place"? Unless I missed something in the MC rules, new posters have exactly the same rights as old ones. Why is LoneStar's "place" any different than anyone else's?

 

>And why would "it be" that I never complained about Rick doing

>the same thing Lone Star is doing? I never had a reason to

>complain. Rick has never turned the lounge upside down with

>one night of constant frivolous posting. Rick is sincere and

>he is not here with malicious intent. Lone Star is here with

>malicious intent.

 

Rick's intent is to use this message board as free advertising for his business. Since the creation of the Web, it has been the custom for members of message boards to deprecate people who try to use the board to advertise products or in other ways for their personal profit. I see no such intent on the part of the person you are slamming.

 

>Lone Star is lucky to have you as a friend defending him.

 

I know nothing of that poster. I do know that I don't like it when people start lecturing the rest of us about the need to uphold standards of conduct that they themselves do not uphold.

[+ Lucky]

"RISE UP CITIZENS OF HOO! Don't sit back and allow this re-zoning of the message center. Fight stupid. Battle stupid. OUTLAW STUPID"

 

We get the message center we want when we unite and fight those who only want to shit in our playground. Thanks for the post, VDN.

[ValleyDwellerNorth]

>Again, your "manners," whatever they may be, obviously do not

>prevent you from starting an entire thread for no other

>purpose than to criticize someone else for doing the exact

>same thing that you have done on other occasions. Some

>manners.

 

What have I done? How is this about me?

 

>>I think most things in life should be self-contained.

>

>Then please try to apply that principle to all the blather you

>post here, and you will be in no danger of hypocrisy when you

>complain about the blather of others.

 

But my blather is coherent and connected. It makes sense and there is a pattern.

 

>In other words, he's done the thing you object to -- hijacking

>-- much more often than the other guy, so that makes it okay.

>Thanks for clearing that up.

 

Well, I never really measured how much anyone has hijacked anything here. Maybe it wasn't always obvious to me as I always try to get to the point of a post. However, Lone Star's avatar is now next to the definition of "obvious" in the dictionary. I have never seen a new poster be "saved" and "anointed" from lurking to all of the sudden respond in almost every thread on the front page of the Lounge WITHIN A DAY. Was this a mental blockage building up all this time and he just had to explode yesterday and today? Maybe I missed the "hi ... I am new here ... I have lurked for so long ... I look forward to participating" virginal post he made (or didn't make).

 

>"He does not know his place"? Unless I missed something in

>the MC rules, new posters have exactly the same rights as old

>ones. Why is LoneStar's "place" any different than anyone

>else's?

 

Respect.

 

>Rick's intent is to use this message board as free advertising

>for his business. Since the creation of the Web, it has been

>the custom for members of message boards to deprecate people

>who try to use the board to advertise products or in other

>ways for their personal profit. I see no such intent on the

>part of the person you are slamming.

 

By all means, I am not slamming anyone. I am identifying. I am sorry my identifying is being interpreted as slamming.

 

 

>I know nothing of that poster. I do know that I don't like it

>when people start lecturing the rest of us about the need to

>uphold standards of conduct that they themselves do not

>uphold.

 

Anne Hutchinson agrees with you.

[woodlawn]

>>Again, your "manners," whatever they may be, obviously do

>not

>>prevent you from starting an entire thread for no other

>>purpose than to criticize someone else for doing the exact

>>same thing that you have done on other occasions. Some

>>manners.

 

>What have I done? How is this about me?

 

For the third time, I believe it is, you have created an entire thread for the purpose of informing the rest of us that in your opinion a particular poster's contributions here are "stupid," "blather" and several other negative things, and that his "hijacking" of other threads makes you think he experienced an incident of sexual abuse in his childhood. You aren't going to lie and deny making those personal attacks, are you? They're right here in this thread for all to see.

 

 

>But my blather is coherent and connected. It makes sense and

>there is a pattern.

 

That's your opinion. I don't happen to share it.

 

 

>Well, I never really measured how much anyone has hijacked

>anything here.

 

That would explain why you yell insults at him for hijacking but ignore others who have done it far more than he has.

 

 

>Was this a mental blockage building up all this time and he

>just had to explode yesterday and today? Maybe I missed the

>"hi ... I am new here ... I have lurked for so long ... I look

>forward to participating" virginal post he made (or didn't

>make).

 

If there is something in the rules that requires new posters to introduce themselves in that way, perhaps you could point it out to the rest of us. I can't see it.

 

>>"He does not know his place"? Unless I missed something in

>>the MC rules, new posters have exactly the same rights as

>old

>>ones. Why is LoneStar's "place" any different than anyone

>>else's?

>

>Respect.

 

Again, new posters occupy exactly the same "place" as veterans.

 

 

>By all means, I am not slamming anyone. I am identifying. I

>am sorry my identifying is being interpreted as slamming.

 

When you call someone else's contributions "stupid," the question of whether you are "slamming" is no longer a matter of interpretation but merely a matter of eyesight. Can you see the word "stupid" in your references to that poster or do you need a new pair of glasses?

 

>>I know nothing of that poster. I do know that I don't like

>it

>>when people start lecturing the rest of us about the need to

>>uphold standards of conduct that they themselves do not

>>uphold.

>

>Anne Hutchinson agrees with you.

 

Good for her.

[ValleyDwellerNorth]

>We get the message center we want when we unite and fight

>those who only want to shit in our playground. Thanks for the

>post, VDN.

 

It was really my pleasure. BTW, do you subscribe to the avatar of the day club?

[woodlawn]

>"RISE UP CITIZENS OF HOO! Don't sit back and allow this

>re-zoning of the message center. Fight stupid. Battle stupid.

>OUTLAW STUPID"

 

>We get the message center we want when we unite and fight

>those who only want to shit in our playground. Thanks for the

>post, VDN.

 

Lucky is an excellent example of posters who complain bitterly about personal attacks that are launched BY people they don't like, but who encourage and applaud such attacks when launched AT people they don't like. There's some discussion in another thread about whether Lucky is old, sick or deserves a number of other unflattering adjectives. I don't know about those terms, but one term that fits him perfectly is "hypocrite."

[ValleyDwellerNorth]

>Lucky is an excellent example of posters who complain bitterly

>about personal attacks that are launched BY people they don't

>like, but who encourage and applaud such attacks when launched

>AT people they don't like. There's some discussion in another

>thread about whether Lucky is old, sick or deserves a number

>of other unflattering adjectives. I don't know about those

>terms, but one term that fits him perfectly is "hypocrite."

 

What's your purpose here? To bring attention to a mean spirited thread? I asked these questions about Lone Star in my original post:

 

Who is Lone Star?

Isn't his quote/signature stupid?

Is he nice or is his purpose here malicious?

Does Texas know about this?

 

Question 1) didn't expect an answer

Question 2) I was following MC rules ... I didn't say HE was stupid

Question 3) Well ..?

Question 4) That was a joke. Humor is in the eye of the beholder. BUT every word on the message center can't have an emoticon.

[ValleyDwellerNorth]

>When you call someone else's contributions "stupid," the

>question of whether you are "slamming" is no longer a matter

>of interpretation but merely a matter of eyesight. Can you

>see the word "stupid" in your references to that poster or do

>you need a new pair of glasses?

 

My visual acuity is excellent. Thank you though for your concern. What concerns me is your defense of someone who makes contributions like these:

 

http://babydb.male4malescorts.com/m4mdc/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=17&topic_id=14900&mesg_id=14900

 

Why would someone so new to the message center post exclusivly in the lounge and only venture to one other section of the message center to annoy Lucky?

[woodlawn]

>What's your purpose here? To bring attention to a mean

>spirited thread?

 

To point out a thread that is both mean spirited and extremely hypocritical.

 

It's been pointed out so many times that the people who are most active in complaining about antisocial behavior here engage in the same behavior themselves whenever they feel like it. One would think at least some of them would get tired of being exposed as hypocrites and knock it off. But they never do. That's one of the reasons I like this place.

 

 

>Question 2) I was following MC rules ... I didn't say HE was

>stupid

 

You referred to him as "freakzilla," did you not? Did you not also say he was "in desperate need of attention"? Did you not say he is "similar to people who cause computer viruses"? I suggest you quit while you're ahead.

[woodlawn]

>My visual acuity is excellent. Thank you though for your

>concern. What concerns me is your defense of someone who

>makes contributions like these:

 

I haven't read the posts you're referring to and don't plan to do so. I don't care what LoneStar wrote. In the past I have defended the posting rights of people who posted vicious slurs against the ethnic group of which I happen to be a member. If free speech is for anyone, then it is for everyone.

 

>Why would someone so new to the message center post exclusivly

>in the lounge and only venture to one other section of the

>message center to annoy Lucky?

 

Why has Lucky from time to time ventured to Escortspeak to post hateful insults directed at individuals who post there? Because he enjoys doing that, I suppose. It isn't as though anyone is forcing him to do it, right?

[ValleyDwellerNorth]

>You referred to him as "freakzilla," did you not? Did you not

 

I know I did. It says so right in the post. I meant it as a compliment.

 

>also say he was "in desperate need of attention"? Did you not

 

Is that negative? Don't we all need attention? This whole site is based around that premise.

 

>say he is "similar to people who cause computer viruses"? I

>suggest you quit while you're ahead.

 

People who make computer viruses know a great deal about computers. That too is a compliment.

 

I have a feeling you see the glass as half empty and not half full.

http://img305.imageshack.us/img305/6541/threadvisualcourtesylion6rb.jpg

[ValleyDwellerNorth]

>I haven't read the posts you're referring to and don't plan to

>do so.

 

Well that, NOT YOU, is just damn silly.

 

>Why has Lucky from time to time ventured to Escortspeak to

>post hateful insults directed at individuals who post there?

>Because he enjoys doing that, I suppose. It isn't as though

>anyone is forcing him to do it, right?

 

Didn't they throw shit in his salad first? Doesn't he have the right to defend himself? No, no one is forcing him. No one forces anyone to post what they do.

 

All I feel is Lone Star got what he wanted ... total Lounge disruption.

[woodlawn]

> That too is a compliment.

>

 

So you meant to compliment LoneStar when you created a thread asking what the FUCK is wrong with him? Here's a compliment for you: I don't think you're stupid enough to believe that anyone will buy that.

 

>I have a feeling you see the glass as half empty and not half

>full.

 

I have a feeling you don't like being called on it when you complain about exactly the same behavior you have engaged in time and time again. But you may as well get used to it, because it isn't going to stop.

[+ Lucky]

RE: What the FUCK is wrong with

 

Hey woodie, how are you celebrating the new year? Just another day at the pub?

 

http://www.czekaj.com/images/portfolio/unhappy.gif

[woodlawn]

>Well that, NOT YOU, is just damn silly.

 

It's silly NOT to read posts that YOU claim contribute absolutely nothing? How can that possibly be true?

 

>>Why has Lucky from time to time ventured to Escortspeak to

>>post hateful insults directed at individuals who post there?

 

 

>Didn't they throw shit in his salad first? Doesn't he have

>the right to defend himself?

 

Defend himself? How does slamming someone else take away negative remarks he has made about you?

 

> No, no one is forcing him. No

>one forces anyone to post what they do.

 

Then my assumption that he posted hate speech because he wanted to must be correct, no?

 

>All I feel is Lone Star got what he wanted ... total Lounge

>disruption.

 

What a ridiculous statement. Look at all the threads on different subjects in the Lounge. Has anyone been prevented from posting whatever he wished by anything LoneStar has done? No. There is only one person associated with this site who ever prevents people from posting what they wish here. Why is it you've never complained about him?

[FourAces]

RE: What the FUCK is wrong with

 

hopefully he will have a luckier New Year Eve than this guy.

 

http://www.prostunts.net/Image%20Captures/Hanging%20Man.jpg

[FourAces]

>

>We get the message center we want when we unite and fight

 

I couldn't agree more.

[FourAces]

VDN I'm just curious what thread was actually hijacked? When I look at some of his posts from last night they are all on topic. What difference is it between what he did and the half dozen other posters who dig up even older threads for no apparent reason?

 

I think you're off base on this one. Just my thoughts.

 

BTW: you might not be up on popular music but the sig he uses, I think, comes from a song that sold about 4 million or so units. Someone obviously liked it. :7

[ValleyDwellerNorth]

> No. There is only one person associated with this site who

>ever prevents people from posting what they wish here. Why is

>it you've never complained about him?

 

Who?

[ValleyDwellerNorth]

> No. There is only one person associated with this site who

>ever prevents people from posting what they wish here. Why is

>it you've never complained about him?

 

Who?