- This topic has 180 replies, 26 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 10 months ago by phaster.
-
AuthorPosts
-
November 24, 2014 at 4:47 PM #21310November 24, 2014 at 4:56 PM #780325AnonymousGuest
A while back, when I actually attempted to read her almost-plausible data-strewn nonsense, there was something that caught my eye:
She complained once that she got in trouble at work for sleeping on the bathroom floor.
The signs were there all along, but that’s when it really hit me.
She posted some made-up stuff about me and my family once. I asked Rich to delete it and he obliged.
Ah, whatever … I wish her the best.
November 24, 2014 at 7:01 PM #780334bearishgurlParticipant[quote=harvey]A while back, when I actually attempted to read her almost-plausible data-strewn nonsense, there was something that caught my eye:
She complained once that she got in trouble at work for sleeping on the bathroom floor.
The signs were there all along, but that’s when it really hit me.
She posted some made-up stuff about me and my family once. I asked Rich to delete it and he obliged.
Ah, whatever … I wish her the best.[/quote]
Uhhhhh, harvey . . . I mean . . . pri_dk (former-champion-of-uninformed-trolling-but-improved-somewhat-as-of-late)?? Can you show the Piggs where I posted your (bolded) statement?
I’m waiting with bated breath :=0
zk, I apologize here if you feel I was trying to make you “look bad.” Your main concern here seems to be that I was but, honestly, I really don’t have the time or desire for those kinds of BS games (especially now) and nothing could be further from the truth. The reality was that I saw an opportunity to “yank your chain” a little because your initial posts on the “tidy” thread clearly stated that you were frustrated with some aspects of living with your “tidy” partner because you were a lifelong “messy person” (“reformed” or not). And there’s nothing wrong with that. But before the thread was even noticed by me, you (rather self-righteously) ranted on and on here in-finitum about all the ways you disagree that “tidiness” has anything to do with one’s character. (I respectfully disagree in that in some cases, tidyness (or lack thereof) has a lot to do with one’s character and we are all entitled to our own opinions.) All of your words here speak for themselves.
I myself have purchased home(s) in the past with particular lots/floor layouts which lent themselves to both indoor and outdoor medium and large-scale entertaining. Upon purchase and a bit of fix-up, I fully expected to use them for that purpose and did just that for many years. I couldn’t imagine in my wildest dreams making the numerous (expensive) improvements you say you did on your lot and then later agreeing to be (unreasonably) restricted by a partner/co-owner as to how I could use my lot!
If I was a co-owner of my residence, my expected use of my/our lot would have been an agreement that was crystal clear between me and my co-owner long before purchase, or at the very least, before spending a small fortune improving the backyard for the sole purpose of entertaining. I see this as a huge issue because often offers are made on a particular parcel solely due to its lot configuration, floor layout of the house, etc, lending itself to the (allowed) uses of it in the mind of a prospective buyer. If there are two or more prospective co-buyers/co-remodelers for the same parcel, then they all or both need to be on the same page regarding the scope and cost of future improvements and future uses of such improvements before making them, or better yet, before purchasing the property together.
I don’t think anybody in their right mind would make the numerous and costly improvements to their BY as you state you did in the “tidy” thread without the expectation of using it to entertain groups of people in. Everyone knows that you can hardly play bocce ball all by yourself.
November 24, 2014 at 7:35 PM #780336spdrunParticipantLighten up kids, or get a room, or something.
November 24, 2014 at 8:28 PM #780337zkParticipant[quote=bearishgurl]zk, I apologize here if you feel I was trying to make you “look bad.” Your main concern here seems to be that I was [/quote]
Really? You really think my main concern is you were trying to make me “look bad?”That is truly ridiculous. My main concern is, obviously, that you made a bunch of stuff up. You lied. About me.
If you want me to accept an apology of yours, apologize for making stuff up.
Apologizing “if [I] feel” a certain way is not an apology for anything you did.
You have yet to even acknowledge the clearly demonstrated fact that you made stuff up. Since you don’t seem capable of even understanding that you’ve made stuff up, I have serious doubts that you can refrain from doing it in the future. And I think that’s bad for this forum.
[quote=bearishgurl] but, honestly, I really don’t have the time or desire for those kinds of BS games (especially now) and nothing could be further from the truth. The reality was that I saw an opportunity to “yank your chain” a little because your initial posts on the “tidy” thread clearly stated that you were frustrated with some aspects of living with your “tidy” partner because you were a lifelong “messy person” (“reformed” or not). [/quote]
Yank my chain all you want, but don’t make stuff up in order to do it. It should be clear that what I’m disgusted about is not you yanking my chain or trying to make me look bad. It should be clear that why I think you should be banned is that you’re making stuff up. I don’t know how to put it any more clearly. I can’t even imagine how you can’t see that from my last 4 or 5 posts. And particularly from the original post on this thread. So let me make it perfectly clear:bg, I don’t care if you yank my chain. I don’t care if you try to make me look bad. If you don’t lie, then I either look bad or good on my own merits, and there’s not much you can do to change that. All I care about is that you don’t lie about me or about what I said .
There. Even you should be able to understand that. It’s not complicated at all.
[quote=bearishgurl] And there’s nothing wrong with that. But before the thread was even noticed by me, you (rather self-righteously) ranted on and on here in-finitum about all the ways you disagree that “tidiness” has anything to do with one’s character. (I respectfully disagree in that in some cases, tidyness (or lack thereof) has a lot to do with one’s character and we are all entitled to our own opinions.) All of your words here speak for themselves. [/quote]
I’m perfectly willing to let my words speak for themselves. It’s when you make up words for me that I have a problem.
November 24, 2014 at 9:19 PM #780341zkParticipant[quote=bearishgurl]
Uhhhhh, harvey . . . I mean . . . pri_dk …?? Can you show the Piggs where I posted your (bolded) statement?
[/quote]
Oh, the irony. Sucks, huh?
November 24, 2014 at 9:20 PM #780343CDMA ENGParticipantSpdrun is right…
The sexual tension is palpable…
CE
November 25, 2014 at 12:07 PM #780371localguyParticipantBG’s post on 11/7/14 is one of the classics….the one in which Peter’s bested DeMaio in the SD mayoral race. Epic.
LocalguyNovember 25, 2014 at 12:32 PM #780374bearishgurlParticipant[quote=localguy]BG’s post on 11/7/14 is one of the classics….the one in which Peter’s bested DeMaio in the SD mayoral race. Epic.
Localguy[/quote]Localguy, IIRC, don’t you reside in Scripps Ranch?
If so, and even if you voted for him, you should be extremely thankful that CDM is not now representing YOU in Washington! He’s a disaster in the making and even though I’m not a resident of the 52nd, I’m relieved to hear that Peters won by the seat of his pants, however that happened.
There is a such a thing as a “charismatic idiot.” CDM fit the bill to a “T” and obviously had a lot of your brethren voters fooled. Here’s a simple layman’s discussion for you explaining the concept:
November 25, 2014 at 4:10 PM #780385NotCrankyParticipant[quote=CDMA ENG]Spdrun is right…
The sexual tension is palpable…
CE[/quote]
No , that was Marion and some others.November 25, 2014 at 5:06 PM #780387AnonymousGuest[quote=bearishgurl]
Uhhhhh, harvey . . . I mean . . . pri_dk (former-champion-of-uninformed-trolling-but-improved-somewhat-as-of-late)?? Can you show the Piggs where I posted your (bolded) statement?
[/quote]LOL! I have no clue where it is, buried somewhere in one of those many long posts describing in detail how public sector work is borderline enslavement while the private sector plays foozball all day.
I’m not gonna dig up proof, so if you want to deny it you certainly can. I got a LOL WTF movement from it, so I appreciate it either way.
[quote=zk]That is truly ridiculous. My main concern is, obviously, that you made a bunch of stuff up. You lied. About me.[/quote]
Really, all you can do is brush it off. You can’t win in an argument with crazy.
Now if I would just take my own advice…
November 26, 2014 at 2:12 AM #780396CA renterParticipant[quote=harvey]A while back, when I actually attempted to read her almost-plausible data-strewn nonsense, there was something that caught my eye:
She complained once that she got in trouble at work for sleeping on the bathroom floor.
The signs were there all along, but that’s when it really hit me.
She posted some made-up stuff about me and my family once. I asked Rich to delete it and he obliged.
Ah, whatever … I wish her the best.[/quote]
Okay, I hate when anybody lies and makes stuff up about other people in some lame attempt to discredit them.
I’ve read pretty much all of the threads on this blog since it started (I actually started reading Rich’s site about 10 years ago, but didn’t sign up right away when he re-instated the ability to comment). I don’t ever remember BG saying that she got in trouble for work for sleeping on the bathroom floor.
Since harvey is one of the worst posters (if not THE worst poster) for twisting other people’s words and making stuff up, I’m going to second BG’s request that you provide proof of this comment you’ve attributed to her.
November 26, 2014 at 2:18 AM #780397CA renterParticipantAs for ZK’s points, he’s absolutely right. EVERYBODY needs to be sure that they are completely honest in their postings and in their representations of other people’s words, thoughts, and beliefs. This is the only way to ensure the integrity and quality of the discussions on these threads. If you aren’t sure about what they mean, ASK FOR CLARIFICATION, and never “edit” someone’s post to make it look like they’ve said something they had neither written nor implied.
November 26, 2014 at 4:40 PM #780418zkParticipant[quote=bearishgurl]
Uhhhhh, harvey . . . I mean . . . pri_dk (former-champion-of-uninformed-trolling-but-improved-somewhat-as-of-late)?? Can you show the Piggs where I posted your (bolded) statement?[/quote]
Really, lyinggurl, the nerve you have to ask someone to show you where he said something after you just got through lying about me dozens of times and never once accurately answered when I asked you many times to show me where I said something is indeed prodigious. I’m not sure how you don’t think you’re screwed up in the head. Then again, I suppose many unstable people are not aware of their disconnect.
November 28, 2014 at 6:18 PM #780455UCGalParticipantI will admit – whenever a post gets too long or too boring… I scroll down to the next post.
There are lots of threads here that *seem* super long but can be skimmed over fast via the “virtual ignore” technique. Several regulars get skimmed by me.
I’m sure people do that to my posts too. (I can be pretty long winded.)
Accuracy is good. But sometimes it’s not worth the drama to engage in a flame war on the inter-tubes.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.