Sign in to follow this  
B.J. Porter

Submitted without comment.

Recommended Posts

I'm not wasting my time digging through hour by hour posts. If you have a specific post, I'll get around to it during a weekend snowstorm with no sports on TV.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who flames out first, Don L'orange, or simple jack?

That's easy - Simple Jack. He either goes overboard and gets whacked with the ban-hammer or he backs down with some pathetic excuse to avoid the ban hammer. Either way, Jack can't win, he knows he can't win, and so this is either his way of flaming out so he can setup a new sock or he had over his allowed daily allotment of caffeinated soda & will realise that when he "sobers" up.

 

Jack is, essentially, a coward. He'll back down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Oh Nerts!

 

Can you quit with the MASH? My box set hasn't shown up yet.

 

Happy, be careful in your assertions. There are ways to go back in the internet and find content.

The stuff doesn't really ever go away. It lives forever on a server, somewhere on the webz.

 

We have tools that we use somewhat often for work.

 

 

By all means go for it. I've waited all these years for someone to add proof to their accusations. If you think you have it post it. If not have the courtesy to say you have nothing.

 

If even half of the lies BJ told are true then the archive here should be filled with proof.

 

Why can't anyone find one and post it. If I edited posts after being proven wrong the there should be posts that quote me that conflict with my "long after edited post"

 

So please dig into it and report back.

 

 

Check the dates on the Archives, Slappy. They don't go back that far. They were purged for disk space and performance in a process I have no control over.

 

I have found that I am far too absentminded to be a good liar. If I just tell the truth then I never have to remember anything.

 

You should try this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

While this shitfight is fun, I'm still waiting for an explanation of wife #4 the Aussie. What happened to wife 3, the Brazilian?

You count four? Estonian, Brazilian, Australian. Where's the fourth? Jack you holding out on us? A Russian perhaps?

 

he used to talk about #3 being the brazilian., Maybe she's an aussie with a brazilian?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

While this shitfight is fun, I'm still waiting for an explanation of wife #4 the Aussie. What happened to wife 3, the Brazilian?

You count four? Estonian, Brazilian, Australian. Where's the fourth? Jack you holding out on us? A Russian perhaps?

 

he used to talk about #3 being the brazilian., Maybe she's an aussie with a brazilian?

 

How many seats in a Ridgeline?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

I'm not sure but I think Nailing Malarkey was permanently banned.

 

 

Are you suggesting that a smart guy like you, what with your coding expertise, couldn't get around this "ban"?

 

 

The answer to your question is all around you .

 

 

Ah, the old "obfuscation" we've come to know and mock.

 

You might be a bit more credible if you gave straight answers. But, then, you'd have to own them.

 

 

That was a direct, literal and factual answer to the question you asked .... think about it.

 

 

look at the lil' patronizing, RWNJ bitch safe behind his keyboard talking to everyone like they're gullible children to be toyed with...

'good luck' with that, but really, why bother?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I have found that I am far too absentminded to be a good liar. If I just tell the truth then I never have to remember anything.

 

You should try this.

 

 

Good advice you should have taken it.

 

Note: When reading the following the MEMBER permissions group mentioned below differs from the MEMBERS group in that the MEMBER group lacks editing privileges.

 

Yesterday you posted the following

 

Post 78

As the guy that handled that report and set up the special "Member" permissions group for you Jack, I can safely tell the community this is an unmitigated lie.

Post 89

I've been moderating this place for fifteen years. I know exactly where the bodies are buried, and what put them there. And I know why certain policies came to be put in place, because I was involved in the discussions that led to their implementation.

Personally, I have identified and permanently banned at least three (3) prior accounts of yours for egregious violations of the Terms of Service of this site

You told a different story(lie) in PMs to me back in 2011

 

PM from BJ May 27 / 2011 6:25 AM

Your not being able to edit "when you created him" doesn't pass the smell test, it's not logical. .... A more likely scenario? You create Happy Jack, all is normal. Someone makes you as returned banned poster and management figures it's easier to just try and keep you a little reined in than begin the whole ban & dodge routine all over again. That seems way more logical.

PM from BJ May 27 2011 1:46 PM

Whether posters sent you harassing PM's is immaterial. Abhorrent and inappropriate, true, but immaterial to you returning to SA repeated pretending to be somebody else (though it probably should have been reported to SA because they do tend to respond to real world crossovers when they are aware of them).

That Dawg suffers you at all is a wonder given how much hassle you've given them by returning repeatedly after being banned - in explicit violation of the terms of service of the web site. That the management might wish to curb your capacity for mayhem rather than trying to keep tracking down and stamping out user ID's and sock puppets is understandable.

BTW your lack of Edit story doesn't pass the sniff test because you claim you couldn't edit from the creation of the Happy Jack username which makes no sense unless SA somehow detected who you were the moment you hit "Submit" to create the new account. The version of events that DOES pass the sniff test is that you join as Happy Jack with a perfectly normal account, then someone in management figures out (or more likely is tipped off) some short while later that you probably are Nailing Malarkey returned once again from Banland and decides to box you in rather than have to deal with another sock puppet/zombie user out break. That seems more...plausible...than what you present. ... I wouldn't want the job of trying to sort out the sock puppets and spammers in this place.

So yesterday you claim clear and unambiguous first hand and knowledge of when and how I lost my editing privileges even claiming you set up the group I was put in just for me. But, in 2011 when I approached you for clarification the best you came up with are "Plausible" and "Logical" guesses who did it, when they did it, why they did it and how.

 

You even said back them "I wouldn't want the job of trying to sort out the sock puppets and spammers in this place." only to change your story yesterday that you were personally responsible for identifying supposed NM aliases and banning them..

 

From twice guessing and speculating it was "someone" to claiming you did it

From not wanting the job of policing socks to claiming you personally tracked and banned NM and who you claim were his socks.

 

Don't worry Porter your sycophants will cover for you, toss out a few bigoted religious attacks and insult my wife as you recently did.

 

You'll continue here but now everyone has poof what a loser and liar you really are.

 

Unlike you and the others I include the evidence when I make a charge.

 

You should try this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which wife Bigamist Jack? The Aussie or the Brazilian?

 

Zero-Credibility Jack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

I have found that I am far too absentminded to be a good liar. If I just tell the truth then I never have to remember anything.

 

You should try this.

 

 

Good advice you should have taken it.

 

Note: When reading the following the MEMBER permissions group mentioned below differs from the MEMBERS group in that the MEMBER group lacks editing privileges.

 

Yesterday you posted the following

 

Post 78

As the guy that handled that report and set up the special "Member" permissions group for you Jack, I can safely tell the community this is an unmitigated lie.

Post 89

I've been moderating this place for fifteen years. I know exactly where the bodies are buried, and what put them there. And I know why certain policies came to be put in place, because I was involved in the discussions that led to their implementation.

Personally, I have identified and permanently banned at least three (3) prior accounts of yours for egregious violations of the Terms of Service of this site

You told a different story(lie) in PMs to me back in 2011

 

PM from BJ May 27 / 2011 6:25 AM

Your not being able to edit "when you created him" doesn't pass the smell test, it's not logical. .... A more likely scenario? You create Happy Jack, all is normal. Someone makes you as returned banned poster and management figures it's easier to just try and keep you a little reined in than begin the whole ban & dodge routine all over again. That seems way more logical.

PM from BJ May 27 2011 1:46 PM

Whether posters sent you harassing PM's is immaterial. Abhorrent and inappropriate, true, but immaterial to you returning to SA repeated pretending to be somebody else (though it probably should have been reported to SA because they do tend to respond to real world crossovers when they are aware of them).

That Dawg suffers you at all is a wonder given how much hassle you've given them by returning repeatedly after being banned - in explicit violation of the terms of service of the web site. That the management might wish to curb your capacity for mayhem rather than trying to keep tracking down and stamping out user ID's and sock puppets is understandable.

BTW your lack of Edit story doesn't pass the sniff test because you claim you couldn't edit from the creation of the Happy Jack username which makes no sense unless SA somehow detected who you were the moment you hit "Submit" to create the new account. The version of events that DOES pass the sniff test is that you join as Happy Jack with a perfectly normal account, then someone in management figures out (or more likely is tipped off) some short while later that you probably are Nailing Malarkey returned once again from Banland and decides to box you in rather than have to deal with another sock puppet/zombie user out break. That seems more...plausible...than what you present. ... I wouldn't want the job of trying to sort out the sock puppets and spammers in this place.

So yesterday you claim clear and unambiguous first hand and knowledge of when and how I lost my editing privileges even claiming you set up the group I was put in just for me. But, in 2011 when I approached you for clarification the best you came up with are "Plausible" and "Logical" guesses who did it, when they did it, why they did it and how.

 

You even said back them "I wouldn't want the job of trying to sort out the sock puppets and spammers in this place." only to change your story yesterday that you were personally responsible for identifying supposed NM aliases and banning them..

 

From twice guessing and speculating it was "someone" to claiming you did it

From not wanting the job of policing socks to claiming you personally tracked and banned NM and who you claim were his socks.

 

Don't worry Porter your sycophants will cover for you, toss out a few bigoted religious attacks and insult my wife as you recently did.

 

You'll continue here but now everyone has poof what a loser and liar you really are.

 

Unlike you and the others I include the evidence when I make a charge.

 

You should try this.

 

 

Oh, boy. Jack is not posting messages in public, is he? If I am not mistaken, that function is labeled "Personal Messenger".

 

Do the gloves come off, now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

I have found that I am far too absentminded to be a good liar. If I just tell the truth then I never have to remember anything.

 

You should try this.

 

 

Good advice you should have taken it.

 

Note: When reading the following the MEMBER permissions group mentioned below differs from the MEMBERS group in that the MEMBER group lacks editing privileges.

 

Yesterday you posted the following

 

Post 78

As the guy that handled that report and set up the special "Member" permissions group for you Jack, I can safely tell the community this is an unmitigated lie.

Post 89

I've been moderating this place for fifteen years. I know exactly where the bodies are buried, and what put them there. And I know why certain policies came to be put in place, because I was involved in the discussions that led to their implementation.

Personally, I have identified and permanently banned at least three (3) prior accounts of yours for egregious violations of the Terms of Service of this site

You told a different story(lie) in PMs to me back in 2011

 

PM from BJ May 27 / 2011 6:25 AM

Your not being able to edit "when you created him" doesn't pass the smell test, it's not logical. .... A more likely scenario? You create Happy Jack, all is normal. Someone makes you as returned banned poster and management figures it's easier to just try and keep you a little reined in than begin the whole ban & dodge routine all over again. That seems way more logical.

PM from BJ May 27 2011 1:46 PM

Whether posters sent you harassing PM's is immaterial. Abhorrent and inappropriate, true, but immaterial to you returning to SA repeated pretending to be somebody else (though it probably should have been reported to SA because they do tend to respond to real world crossovers when they are aware of them).

That Dawg suffers you at all is a wonder given how much hassle you've given them by returning repeatedly after being banned - in explicit violation of the terms of service of the web site. That the management might wish to curb your capacity for mayhem rather than trying to keep tracking down and stamping out user ID's and sock puppets is understandable.

BTW your lack of Edit story doesn't pass the sniff test because you claim you couldn't edit from the creation of the Happy Jack username which makes no sense unless SA somehow detected who you were the moment you hit "Submit" to create the new account. The version of events that DOES pass the sniff test is that you join as Happy Jack with a perfectly normal account, then someone in management figures out (or more likely is tipped off) some short while later that you probably are Nailing Malarkey returned once again from Banland and decides to box you in rather than have to deal with another sock puppet/zombie user out break. That seems more...plausible...than what you present. ... I wouldn't want the job of trying to sort out the sock puppets and spammers in this place.

So yesterday you claim clear and unambiguous first hand and knowledge of when and how I lost my editing privileges even claiming you set up the group I was put in just for me. But, in 2011 when I approached you for clarification the best you came up with are "Plausible" and "Logical" guesses who did it, when they did it, why they did it and how.

 

You even said back them "I wouldn't want the job of trying to sort out the sock puppets and spammers in this place." only to change your story yesterday that you were personally responsible for identifying supposed NM aliases and banning them..

 

From twice guessing and speculating it was "someone" to claiming you did it

From not wanting the job of policing socks to claiming you personally tracked and banned NM and who you claim were his socks.

 

Don't worry Porter your sycophants will cover for you, toss out a few bigoted religious attacks and insult my wife as you recently did.

 

You'll continue here but now everyone has poof what a loser and liar you really are.

 

Unlike you and the others I include the evidence when I make a charge.

 

You should try this.

 

 

Oh, boy. Jack is not posting messages in public, is he? If I am not mistaken, that function is labeled "Personal Messenger".

 

Do the gloves come off, now?

 

 

Don't care. You already know how I feel about someone lying about me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

I have found that I am far too absentminded to be a good liar. If I just tell the truth then I never have to remember anything.

 

You should try this.

 

Good advice you should have taken it.

 

Note: When reading the following the MEMBER permissions group mentioned below differs from the MEMBERS group in that the MEMBER group lacks editing privileges.

 

Yesterday you posted the following

 

Post 78

As the guy that handled that report and set up the special "Member" permissions group for you Jack, I can safely tell the community this is an unmitigated lie.

Post 89

I've been moderating this place for fifteen years. I know exactly where the bodies are buried, and what put them there. And I know why certain policies came to be put in place, because I was involved in the discussions that led to their implementation.

Personally, I have identified and permanently banned at least three (3) prior accounts of yours for egregious violations of the Terms of Service of this site

You told a different story(lie) in PMs to me back in 2011

 

PM from BJ May 27 / 2011 6:25 AM

Your not being able to edit "when you created him" doesn't pass the smell test, it's not logical. .... A more likely scenario? You create Happy Jack, all is normal. Someone makes you as returned banned poster and management figures it's easier to just try and keep you a little reined in than begin the whole ban & dodge routine all over again. That seems way more logical.

PM from BJ May 27 2011 1:46 PM

Whether posters sent you harassing PM's is immaterial. Abhorrent and inappropriate, true, but immaterial to you returning to SA repeated pretending to be somebody else (though it probably should have been reported to SA because they do tend to respond to real world crossovers when they are aware of them).

That Dawg suffers you at all is a wonder given how much hassle you've given them by returning repeatedly after being banned - in explicit violation of the terms of service of the web site. That the management might wish to curb your capacity for mayhem rather than trying to keep tracking down and stamping out user ID's and sock puppets is understandable.

BTW your lack of Edit story doesn't pass the sniff test because you claim you couldn't edit from the creation of the Happy Jack username which makes no sense unless SA somehow detected who you were the moment you hit "Submit" to create the new account. The version of events that DOES pass the sniff test is that you join as Happy Jack with a perfectly normal account, then someone in management figures out (or more likely is tipped off) some short while later that you probably are Nailing Malarkey returned once again from Banland and decides to box you in rather than have to deal with another sock puppet/zombie user out break. That seems more...plausible...than what you present. ... I wouldn't want the job of trying to sort out the sock puppets and spammers in this place.

So yesterday you claim clear and unambiguous first hand and knowledge of when and how I lost my editing privileges even claiming you set up the group I was put in just for me. But, in 2011 when I approached you for clarification the best you came up with are "Plausible" and "Logical" guesses who did it, when they did it, why they did it and how.

 

You even said back them "I wouldn't want the job of trying to sort out the sock puppets and spammers in this place." only to change your story yesterday that you were personally responsible for identifying supposed NM aliases and banning them..

 

From twice guessing and speculating it was "someone" to claiming you did it

From not wanting the job of policing socks to claiming you personally tracked and banned NM and who you claim were his socks.

 

Don't worry Porter your sycophants will cover for you, toss out a few bigoted religious attacks and insult my wife as you recently did.

 

You'll continue here but now everyone has poof what a loser and liar you really are.

 

Unlike you and the others I include the evidence when I make a charge.

 

You should try this.

Oh, boy. Jack is not posting messages in public, is he? If I am not mistaken, that function is labeled "Personal Messenger".

 

Do the gloves come off, now?

Don't care. You already know how I feel about someone lying about me.

Says the lying sock that can't remember which version of the wife he'd assigned to this sock.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've stopped reading any of Jacks responses, I can see there's words but my eyes just slide over.

Coors has that effect too.

I miss intelligible and semi-educated arsehes like DoRag, at least I could read their posts without my Intelligence being turned off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

I have found that I am far too absentminded to be a good liar. If I just tell the truth then I never have to remember anything.

 

You should try this.

 

 

Good advice you should have taken it.

 

Note: When reading the following the MEMBER permissions group mentioned below differs from the MEMBERS group in that the MEMBER group lacks editing privileges.

 

Yesterday you posted the following

 

Post 78

As the guy that handled that report and set up the special "Member" permissions group for you Jack, I can safely tell the community this is an unmitigated lie.

Post 89

I've been moderating this place for fifteen years. I know exactly where the bodies are buried, and what put them there. And I know why certain policies came to be put in place, because I was involved in the discussions that led to their implementation.

Personally, I have identified and permanently banned at least three (3) prior accounts of yours for egregious violations of the Terms of Service of this site

You told a different story(lie) in PMs to me back in 2011

 

PM from BJ May 27 / 2011 6:25 AM

Your not being able to edit "when you created him" doesn't pass the smell test, it's not logical. .... A more likely scenario? You create Happy Jack, all is normal. Someone makes you as returned banned poster and management figures it's easier to just try and keep you a little reined in than begin the whole ban & dodge routine all over again. That seems way more logical.

PM from BJ May 27 2011 1:46 PM

Whether posters sent you harassing PM's is immaterial. Abhorrent and inappropriate, true, but immaterial to you returning to SA repeated pretending to be somebody else (though it probably should have been reported to SA because they do tend to respond to real world crossovers when they are aware of them).

That Dawg suffers you at all is a wonder given how much hassle you've given them by returning repeatedly after being banned - in explicit violation of the terms of service of the web site. That the management might wish to curb your capacity for mayhem rather than trying to keep tracking down and stamping out user ID's and sock puppets is understandable.

BTW your lack of Edit story doesn't pass the sniff test because you claim you couldn't edit from the creation of the Happy Jack username which makes no sense unless SA somehow detected who you were the moment you hit "Submit" to create the new account. The version of events that DOES pass the sniff test is that you join as Happy Jack with a perfectly normal account, then someone in management figures out (or more likely is tipped off) some short while later that you probably are Nailing Malarkey returned once again from Banland and decides to box you in rather than have to deal with another sock puppet/zombie user out break. That seems more...plausible...than what you present. ... I wouldn't want the job of trying to sort out the sock puppets and spammers in this place.

So yesterday you claim clear and unambiguous first hand and knowledge of when and how I lost my editing privileges even claiming you set up the group I was put in just for me. But, in 2011 when I approached you for clarification the best you came up with are "Plausible" and "Logical" guesses who did it, when they did it, why they did it and how.

 

You even said back them "I wouldn't want the job of trying to sort out the sock puppets and spammers in this place." only to change your story yesterday that you were personally responsible for identifying supposed NM aliases and banning them..

 

From twice guessing and speculating it was "someone" to claiming you did it

From not wanting the job of policing socks to claiming you personally tracked and banned NM and who you claim were his socks.

 

Don't worry Porter your sycophants will cover for you, toss out a few bigoted religious attacks and insult my wife as you recently did.

 

You'll continue here but now everyone has poof what a loser and liar you really are.

 

Unlike you and the others I include the evidence when I make a charge.

 

You should try this.

 

 

Oh, boy. Jack is not posting messages in public, is he? If I am not mistaken, that function is labeled "Personal Messenger".

 

Do the gloves come off, now?

 

 

Don't care. You already know how I feel about someone lying about me.

 

 

For a guy who doesn't care, you sure do spend a lot of time and energy arguing and defending some sort of "honor" on an anonymous internet forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

 

I have found that I am far too absentminded to be a good liar. If I just tell the truth then I never have to remember anything.

 

You should try this.

 

 

Good advice you should have taken it.

 

Note: When reading the following the MEMBER permissions group mentioned below differs from the MEMBERS group in that the MEMBER group lacks editing privileges.

 

Yesterday you posted the following

 

Post 78

As the guy that handled that report and set up the special "Member" permissions group for you Jack, I can safely tell the community this is an unmitigated lie.

Post 89

I've been moderating this place for fifteen years. I know exactly where the bodies are buried, and what put them there. And I know why certain policies came to be put in place, because I was involved in the discussions that led to their implementation.

Personally, I have identified and permanently banned at least three (3) prior accounts of yours for egregious violations of the Terms of Service of this site

You told a different story(lie) in PMs to me back in 2011

 

PM from BJ May 27 / 2011 6:25 AM

Your not being able to edit "when you created him" doesn't pass the smell test, it's not logical. .... A more likely scenario? You create Happy Jack, all is normal. Someone makes you as returned banned poster and management figures it's easier to just try and keep you a little reined in than begin the whole ban & dodge routine all over again. That seems way more logical.

PM from BJ May 27 2011 1:46 PM

Whether posters sent you harassing PM's is immaterial. Abhorrent and inappropriate, true, but immaterial to you returning to SA repeated pretending to be somebody else (though it probably should have been reported to SA because they do tend to respond to real world crossovers when they are aware of them).

That Dawg suffers you at all is a wonder given how much hassle you've given them by returning repeatedly after being banned - in explicit violation of the terms of service of the web site. That the management might wish to curb your capacity for mayhem rather than trying to keep tracking down and stamping out user ID's and sock puppets is understandable.

BTW your lack of Edit story doesn't pass the sniff test because you claim you couldn't edit from the creation of the Happy Jack username which makes no sense unless SA somehow detected who you were the moment you hit "Submit" to create the new account. The version of events that DOES pass the sniff test is that you join as Happy Jack with a perfectly normal account, then someone in management figures out (or more likely is tipped off) some short while later that you probably are Nailing Malarkey returned once again from Banland and decides to box you in rather than have to deal with another sock puppet/zombie user out break. That seems more...plausible...than what you present. ... I wouldn't want the job of trying to sort out the sock puppets and spammers in this place.

So yesterday you claim clear and unambiguous first hand and knowledge of when and how I lost my editing privileges even claiming you set up the group I was put in just for me. But, in 2011 when I approached you for clarification the best you came up with are "Plausible" and "Logical" guesses who did it, when they did it, why they did it and how.

 

You even said back them "I wouldn't want the job of trying to sort out the sock puppets and spammers in this place." only to change your story yesterday that you were personally responsible for identifying supposed NM aliases and banning them..

 

From twice guessing and speculating it was "someone" to claiming you did it

From not wanting the job of policing socks to claiming you personally tracked and banned NM and who you claim were his socks.

 

Don't worry Porter your sycophants will cover for you, toss out a few bigoted religious attacks and insult my wife as you recently did.

 

You'll continue here but now everyone has poof what a loser and liar you really are.

 

Unlike you and the others I include the evidence when I make a charge.

 

You should try this.

 

 

Oh, boy. Jack is not posting messages in public, is he? If I am not mistaken, that function is labeled "Personal Messenger".

 

Do the gloves come off, now?

 

 

Don't care. You already know how I feel about someone lying about me.

 

 

For a guy who doesn't care, you sure do spend a lot of time and energy arguing and defending some sort of "honor" on an anonymous internet forum.

 

 

I always defend my honor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I have found that I am far too absentminded to be a good liar. If I just tell the truth then I never have to remember anything.

 

You should try this.

 

 

Good advice you should have taken it.

 

Note: When reading the following the MEMBER permissions group mentioned below differs from the MEMBERS group in that the MEMBER group lacks editing privileges.

 

Yesterday you posted the following

 

 

Post 78

As the guy that handled that report and set up the special "Member" permissions group for you Jack, I can safely tell the community this is an unmitigated lie.

Post 89

I've been moderating this place for fifteen years. I know exactly where the bodies are buried, and what put them there. And I know why certain policies came to be put in place, because I was involved in the discussions that led to their implementation.

Personally, I have identified and permanently banned at least three (3) prior accounts of yours for egregious violations of the Terms of Service of this site

You told a different story(lie) in PMs to me back in 2011

 

 

PM from BJ May 27 / 2011 6:25 AM

Your not being able to edit "when you created him" doesn't pass the smell test, it's not logical. .... A more likely scenario? You create Happy Jack, all is normal. Someone makes you as returned banned poster and management figures it's easier to just try and keep you a little reined in than begin the whole ban & dodge routine all over again. That seems way more logical.

PM from BJ May 27 2011 1:46 PM

Whether posters sent you harassing PM's is immaterial. Abhorrent and inappropriate, true, but immaterial to you returning to SA repeated pretending to be somebody else (though it probably should have been reported to SA because they do tend to respond to real world crossovers when they are aware of them).

That Dawg suffers you at all is a wonder given how much hassle you've given them by returning repeatedly after being banned - in explicit violation of the terms of service of the web site. That the management might wish to curb your capacity for mayhem rather than trying to keep tracking down and stamping out user ID's and sock puppets is understandable.

BTW your lack of Edit story doesn't pass the sniff test because you claim you couldn't edit from the creation of the Happy Jack username which makes no sense unless SA somehow detected who you were the moment you hit "Submit" to create the new account. The version of events that DOES pass the sniff test is that you join as Happy Jack with a perfectly normal account, then someone in management figures out (or more likely is tipped off) some short while later that you probably are Nailing Malarkey returned once again from Banland and decides to box you in rather than have to deal with another sock puppet/zombie user out break. That seems more...plausible...than what you present. ... I wouldn't want the job of trying to sort out the sock puppets and spammers in this place.

So yesterday you claim clear and unambiguous first hand and knowledge of when and how I lost my editing privileges even claiming you set up the group I was put in just for me. But, in 2011 when I approached you for clarification the best you came up with are "Plausible" and "Logical" guesses who did it, when they did it, why they did it and how.

 

You even said back them "I wouldn't want the job of trying to sort out the sock puppets and spammers in this place." only to change your story yesterday that you were personally responsible for identifying supposed NM aliases and banning them..

 

From twice guessing and speculating it was "someone" to claiming you did it

From not wanting the job of policing socks to claiming you personally tracked and banned NM and who you claim were his socks.

 

Don't worry Porter your sycophants will cover for you, toss out a few bigoted religious attacks and insult my wife as you recently did.

 

You'll continue here but now everyone has poof what a loser and liar you really are.

 

Unlike you and the others I include the evidence when I make a charge.

 

You should try this.

 

Oh, boy. Jack is not posting messages in public, is he? If I am not mistaken, that function is labeled "Personal Messenger".

 

Do the gloves come off, now?

 

Don't care. You already know how I feel about someone lying about me.

 

For a guy who doesn't care, you sure do spend a lot of time and energy arguing and defending some sort of "honor" on an anonymous internet forum.

 

I always defend my honor.

 

Instead of defending your lack of honor (hell, you can't keep which wife you lied about straight) why don't you just HAVE some honor?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

Good advice you should have taken it.

 

Note: When reading the following the MEMBER permissions group mentioned below differs from the MEMBERS group in that the MEMBER group lacks editing privileges.

 

Yesterday you posted the following

 

Post 78

As the guy that handled that report and set up the special "Member" permissions group for you Jack, I can safely tell the community this is an unmitigated lie.

Post 89

I've been moderating this place for fifteen years. I know exactly where the bodies are buried, and what put them there. And I know why certain policies came to be put in place, because I was involved in the discussions that led to their implementation.

Personally, I have identified and permanently banned at least three (3) prior accounts of yours for egregious violations of the Terms of Service of this site

You told a different story(lie) in PMs to me back in 2011

 

PM from BJ May 27 / 2011 6:25 AM

Your not being able to edit "when you created him" doesn't pass the smell test, it's not logical. .... A more likely scenario? You create Happy Jack, all is normal. Someone makes you as returned banned poster and management figures it's easier to just try and keep you a little reined in than begin the whole ban & dodge routine all over again. That seems way more logical.

PM from BJ May 27 2011 1:46 PM

Whether posters sent you harassing PM's is immaterial. Abhorrent and inappropriate, true, but immaterial to you returning to SA repeated pretending to be somebody else (though it probably should have been reported to SA because they do tend to respond to real world crossovers when they are aware of them).

That Dawg suffers you at all is a wonder given how much hassle you've given them by returning repeatedly after being banned - in explicit violation of the terms of service of the web site. That the management might wish to curb your capacity for mayhem rather than trying to keep tracking down and stamping out user ID's and sock puppets is understandable.

BTW your lack of Edit story doesn't pass the sniff test because you claim you couldn't edit from the creation of the Happy Jack username which makes no sense unless SA somehow detected who you were the moment you hit "Submit" to create the new account. The version of events that DOES pass the sniff test is that you join as Happy Jack with a perfectly normal account, then someone in management figures out (or more likely is tipped off) some short while later that you probably are Nailing Malarkey returned once again from Banland and decides to box you in rather than have to deal with another sock puppet/zombie user out break. That seems more...plausible...than what you present. ... I wouldn't want the job of trying to sort out the sock puppets and spammers in this place.

So yesterday you claim clear and unambiguous first hand and knowledge of when and how I lost my editing privileges even claiming you set up the group I was put in just for me. But, in 2011 when I approached you for clarification the best you came up with are "Plausible" and "Logical" guesses who did it, when they did it, why they did it and how.

 

You even said back them "I wouldn't want the job of trying to sort out the sock puppets and spammers in this place." only to change your story yesterday that you were personally responsible for identifying supposed NM aliases and banning them..

 

From twice guessing and speculating it was "someone" to claiming you did it

From not wanting the job of policing socks to claiming you personally tracked and banned NM and who you claim were his socks.

 

Don't worry Porter your sycophants will cover for you, toss out a few bigoted religious attacks and insult my wife as you recently did.

 

You'll continue here but now everyone has poof what a loser and liar you really are.

 

Unlike you and the others I include the evidence when I make a charge.

 

You should try this.

 

 

Oh, boy. Jack is not posting messages in public, is he? If I am not mistaken, that function is labeled "Personal Messenger".

 

Do the gloves come off, now?

 

 

Don't care. You already know how I feel about someone lying about me.

 

 

For a guy who doesn't care, you sure do spend a lot of time and energy arguing and defending some sort of "honor" on an anonymous internet forum.

 

 

I always defend my honor.

 

 

That sounds ridiculous, given that you know no one here knows who you really are, and really doesn't care.

 

Besides, whose honor are you defending? That of Happy Jack or your previous nom de plume(s)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, Happy Jack selectively "quoting" private messages he knows cannot be verified, checked, or otherwise validated. And he claims it's about his "honour"? :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Oh Nerts!

 

Can you quit with the MASH? My box set hasn't shown up yet.

 

Happy, be careful in your assertions. There are ways to go back in the internet and find content.

The stuff doesn't really ever go away. It lives forever on a server, somewhere on the webz.

 

We have tools that we use somewhat often for work.

 

 

By all means go for it. I've waited all these years for someone to add proof to their accusations. If you think you have it post it. If not have the courtesy to say you have nothing.

 

If even half of the lies BJ told are true then the archive here should be filled with proof.

 

Why can't anyone find one and post it. If I edited posts after being proven wrong the there should be posts that quote me that conflict with my "long after edited post"

 

So please dig into it and report back.

 

 

Check the dates on the Archives, Slappy. They don't go back that far. They were purged for disk space and performance in a process I have no control over.

 

I have found that I am far too absentminded to be a good liar. If I just tell the truth then I never have to remember anything.

 

You should try this.

 

Lying is a lot easier when you're telling someone something they want to believe. That really works for Trump.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

I have found that I am far too absentminded to be a good liar. If I just tell the truth then I never have to remember anything.

 

You should try this.

 

 

 

You'll continue here but now everyone has poof what a loser and liar you really are.

 

BJ is a poof? Fark his wife isn't going to be happy about that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Oh, boy. Jack is not posting messages in public, is he? If I am not mistaken, that function is labeled "Personal Messenger".

 

Do the gloves come off, now?

 

 

Don't care. You already know how I feel about someone lying about me.

 

 

They don't lie about you - they present alternative facts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Oh, boy. Jack is not posting messages in public, is he? If I am not mistaken, that function is labeled "Personal Messenger".

 

Do the gloves come off, now?

 

 

Don't care. You already know how I feel about someone lying about me.

 

 

They don't lie about you - they present alternative facts.

 

 

we're just trying to keep up with HJ's lies.

 

Brown Brazilian wife, nope, Aussie Wife. Not sure of skin tone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe it's just an Ozzie wife with a Brazilian?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, Happy Jack selectively "quoting" private messages he knows cannot be verified, checked, or otherwise validated. And he claims it's about his "honour"? :lol:

 

The irony of Happy Jack defending his nonexistent "honor" by committing the most dishonorable acts you can take on these forums - namely, disclosing the contents of a private message without the consent of the other party - is not lost. That this came from a PM conversation, intitiated by Happy Jack to me with the subject line "I decided this should be private" is simply icing on the hypocrisy cake. In this conversation, among other things, he gave me the password to his account and told me to verify his PM conversations with Dawg. I declined. I mean..ew?

 

Now...are you all ready for the Happy Jack Rake Dance ™? 'Cause here it comes.

 

Who here remembers about when I was finally and formally outed here as a Moderator? Anyone? I'm not talking about the sly innuendos and bullshit, I am talking about when I was forced to acknowledge it publicly because a few people had spread the information too far to control while I was off shore and out of contact.

 

That last should be a hint: it happened WELL after I left to go cruising. I left cruising in July 2012, I finally had to openly acknowledge my role here sometime in 2013 or 2014. Prior to going cruising, any attempts to out me were quickly shut down and excised. Once I started crossing oceans and anchoring in poorly populated places with crap internet, JT & Co. had the opportunity to move in and make the hit since I was often absent from SA for days or weeks at a stretch.

 

Here comes the rake, Happy Jack!

 

Yeah, look at the dates of those Private Messages HJ quotes. They were in 2011. In them, he was conversing with B.J. Porter, SA Private Citizen, and not Underdawg, SA Moderator. In fact, he implores me to read his conversations with Dawg, a known moderator. As myself, I could not possibly answer for what SA was doing with my private account, because my role as a moderator was not general and public knowledge at the point. So I could not tell him what I, or SA, was doing without disclosing my role as a Moderator. Without the entire conversation (as we know selective and deceitful editing is his MO) he doesn't make it clear that this is two SA forum members talking to each other. Not me talking to him in a HJ/Moderator conversation.

 

izsjRT.gif

 

But wait, there's more...

 

That being said...in presenting my "theories" to him about What Really Happened, I actually told him under the guise of supposition exactly what what happened because I was the one that had done it, but could not disclose that to protect my privacy.

 

izsjRT.gif

 

So Sideshow Jack has managed to:

  1. Dishonor himself by posting a PM without my permission. Smooth move, Jack.
  2. Prove that I have been telling him the exact same thing for six years about what happened to him

Does anyone think I have Happy Jack's implicit permission to post the ENTIRE conversation? Because I'm not going to go back and try to figure out how he might have edited my words beyond than simply extracting them from the larger context of the conversation? Knowing him, he probably did. Go ahead and delete your end if you want to avoid that, Happy, because I printed it out to a PDF and saved it already.

 

Or are we satisfied that he is a whiny, lying, manipulative cockwomble without me pounding him any harder and running up the score?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re-reading that thread, I realized I'd forgotten Dagger Bored. So it's FOUR prior aliases I've banned, not three.

 

So we have:

 

Nailing Malarkey Banned

U Bent Stom Banned

Dagger Bored Banned

Killery Again Man Banned

 

and finally, after a gap of a couple of years, Happy Jack.

 

Am I missing any others? Help me here, Jack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think Happy has given you permission at all. He's still counting on the fact you have enough "honor" not to respond by pulling the pin on that grenade. He knows what he's done is underhanded and needs for you to remain the "bigger man" for his line of bullshit to play out.

 

That said, I reckon pose this one to him (in this thread): "Happy Jack, having provided snippets of our private conversations, do you concede to the other party publishing private conversations with you? Yes or no."

 

He won't give you the permission, but damn the flailing for an excuse to avoid his end of private conversations from being exposed will be amusing to watch. Having had a couple of those PM conversations with Jack where he tries to spin shit in the background he won't say in public, I can imagine he's a little panicky right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh man, you really can't make this shit up.

Thanks for dragging up that old PM exchange, Jack. I found this precious bit in it - it's from ME to YOU, written six years ago, where I call your character out to a T!

Since I wrote it and am not including any words from HJ, I see no objection to quoting myself. It is just too awesome, to have predicted in a PM conversation in 2011 that Happy Jack would indeed take parts of that very same conversation public!

OK, this is about nine paragraphs more than I ever intended in a private dialog with you, I think you are dishonest enough to post portions of it therefore I really do not want to engage you in PMs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think Happy has given you permission at all. He's still counting on the fact you have enough "honor" not to respond by pulling the pin on that grenade. He knows what he's done is underhanded and needs for you to remain the "bigger man" for his line of bullshit to play out.

 

That said, I reckon pose this one to him (in this thread): "Happy Jack, having provided snippets of our private conversations, do you concede to the other party publishing private conversations with you? Yes or no."

 

He won't give you the permission, but damn the flailing for an excuse to avoid his end of private conversations from being exposed will be amusing to watch. Having had a couple of those PM conversations with Jack where he tries to spin shit in the background he won't say in public, I can imagine he's a little panicky right now.

 

Yeah, I don't see him doing that. Without his explicit permission to put it out there I couldn't. I promised as much in the thread right after scolding him. I hesitate even to quote myself, but that's how I roll.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ask him explicitly anyway. Worst he can do is flail about a bit then make another sock. *shrug*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ask him explicitly anyway. Worst he can do is flail about a bit then make another sock. *shrug*

 

Nah, I won't ask him. I'm not particularly interested in posting it unless he persists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jack never changed, he just changed his tactics so he wouldn't get booted. Has a YUGE button on lying. YUGE. And I still think he uses a sock or socks to do his heavy lifting. He bees one twisted little dude.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Ask him explicitly anyway. Worst he can do is flail about a bit then make another sock. *shrug*

Nah, I won't ask him. I'm not particularly interested in posting it unless he persists.

He is one of the most disengenuous, lying, hypocritical fucks I've ever encountered. Thank you for the work you put into publicly filleting his ass. I enjoyed it with a glass of wine.

Okay, that didn't come out right, but you know what I mean.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We shall name this day...

National Day of Patriotic Ejection

 

Goodbye Jack, and may god have mercy on your soul.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you are in for a big surprise if you think this is the end of simple jack. He is as welcome as Herpes, and of similar lifespan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you are in for a big surprise if you think this is the end of simple jack. He is as welcome as Herpes, and of similar lifespan.

 

Yeah, he's slunk off to lick his wounds for a bit. But he'll be back in a few hours or a days, pretending all of this never happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The place will be dull if you guys chase off all the Ralph's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

you are in for a big surprise if you think this is the end of simple jack. He is as welcome as Herpes, and of similar lifespan.

 

Yeah, he's slunk off to lick his wounds for a bit. But he'll be back in a few hours or a days, pretending all of this never happened.

Flick Him Off! Flick Him Off! Flick Him Off!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That sounds ridiculous, given that you know no one here knows who you really are, and really doesn't care.

 

Besides, whose honor are you defending? That of Happy Jack or your previous nom de plume(s)?

 

 

 

There is a person behind Bus Driver. There is a person behind Happy Jack,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That sounds ridiculous, given that you know no one here knows who you really are, and really doesn't care.

 

Besides, whose honor are you defending? That of Happy Jack or your previous nom de plume(s)?

 

 

There is a person behind Bus Driver. There is a person behind Happy Jack,

20 questions! Is that person a man?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That sounds ridiculous, given that you know no one here knows who you really are, and really doesn't care.

 

Besides, whose honor are you defending? That of Happy Jack or your previous nom de plume(s)?

 

 

There is a person behind Bus Driver. There is a person behind Happy Jack,

Yeah, but I'm not continually trying to prove myself on an anonymous Internet forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

That sounds ridiculous, given that you know no one here knows who you really are, and really doesn't care.

 

Besides, whose honor are you defending? That of Happy Jack or your previous nom de plume(s)?

 

 

There is a person behind Bus Driver. There is a person behind Happy Jack,

Yeah, but I'm not continually trying to prove myself on an anonymous Internet forum.

 

 

That is your choice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh look, Happy is back.

Going to go round three? Or do you think you've scuffed BJ's knuckles with your chin enough for one day?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That sounds ridiculous, given that you know no one here knows who you really are, and really doesn't care.

 

Besides, whose honor are you defending? That of Happy Jack or your previous nom de plume(s)?

 

 

There is a person behind Bus Driver. There is a person behind Happy Jack,

Oh here we go. High road time again.

 

Who's turn is it to play the fucking violin?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That sounds ridiculous, given that you know no one here knows who you really are, and really doesn't care.

 

Besides, whose honor are you defending? That of Happy Jack or your previous nom de plume(s)?

 

 

 

There is a person behind Bus Driver. There is a person behind Happy Jack,

 

 

One is a likable, thoughtful person with values and dignity. The other is Jack.

 

Time to sign off Jack. You've over stayed your welcome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

you are in for a big surprise if you think this is the end of simple jack. He is as welcome as Herpes, and of similar lifespan.

Yeah, he's slunk off to lick his wounds for a bit. But he'll be back in a few hours or a days, pretending all of this never happened.

Flick Him Off! Flick Him Off! Flick Him Off!

 

 

If you ignore his fundamental violation of the TOS by showing up here after he's been banned, he actually hasn't broken any rules that merit suspension or banning.

 

It's taken him four or five tries, but HJ actually has seemed to have learned the rules for the most part. As mentioned previously, it's more work to keep him out than it's worth so long as he behaves.

 

"Don't disclose the contents of Private Messages" is more like a unwritten but universally understood code of ethics, not an actual rule in the Terms of Service. Kind of like those unwritten rules of manhood, like passing another naked guy in the locker room ass to ass instead of junk to junk that we all know instinctively. Unless, of course, one lacks certain basic instincts WRT honesty and ethics, in which case they'd wag their junk in your face while you're sitting on the bench putting your socks on like HJ here.

 

 

 

Emphasis added.

 

1. Acceptance of Terms.

 

We have created these terms of use to govern your use and access of www.sailinganarchy.com (the “Websiteâ€) and our related social media sites (“Agreementâ€). The following are terms of a legal agreement between you and Sailing Anarchy and its affiliated third parties including those acting on our behalf as we provide this Website and its products and services to you. Affiliated third parties may include companies who perform services for Sailing Anarchy.

By accessing, browsing and/or using this Website you acknowledge that you have read, understood, and agree to be bound by these terms and to comply with all applicable laws and regulations.

If you do not agree with these terms, please do not use this Website. In using this Website, you represent and warrant that you are at least 16 years of age and have any and all permissions necessary to enter into and be bound by this Agreement.

 

 

6. Use of Service.

...

 

Your access to Sailing Anarchy, including the Forums, is completely at the discretion of Sailing Anarchy, and may be blocked, suspended, or terminated at any time for any reason including, but not limited to, violation of this Agreement or other Sailing Anarchy policies, actions that may lead to liability for Sailing Anarchy, violation of applicable laws or regulations or other reasons determined by Sailing Anarchy.

 

Explicit in those rules are two things:

1) By coming here and creating an account, you agree to abide by the rules.

2) One of those rules is that you can be flicked for any reason the management sees fit.

 

Since you agree to the rules by creating a new sock once you've been flicked, you automatically break those rules the second you access the boards after you've been flicked once already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That sounds ridiculous, given that you know no one here knows who you really are, and really doesn't care.

 

Besides, whose honor are you defending? That of Happy Jack or your previous nom de plume(s)?

 

 

 

There is a person behind Bus Driver. There is a person behind Happy Jack,

 

 

Indeed there is a person behind Happy Jack, and there is one behind B.J. Porter too. In this case it's someone whose name you know and you can find in seconds if you so chose.

 

You should consider these things before you post. I know I do.

 

It's kind of late now to start thinking about them though, after spending the last decade+ taking a shit on everyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

f0d36c2f3009dd4429e2d6b4dea89afe.jpg

 

A very good man...

 

A young man who knows and loves the Book of Mormon, who has read it several times, who has an abiding testimony

of its truthfulness, and who applies its teachings will be able to stand against the wiles of the devil and

will be a mighty tool in the hands of the Lord.

Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/e/ezra_taft_benson.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

That sounds ridiculous, given that you know no one here knows who you really are, and really doesn't care.

 

Besides, whose honor are you defending? That of Happy Jack or your previous nom de plume(s)?

 

 

 

There is a person behind Bus Driver. There is a person behind Happy Jack,

 

 

Indeed there is a person behind Happy Jack, and there is one behind B.J. Porter too. In this case it's someone whose name you know and you can find in seconds if you so chose.

 

You should consider these things before you post. I know I do.

 

It's kind of late now to start thinking about them though, after spending the last decade+ taking a shit on everyone.

 

A person should consider the life and teachings of Jesus Christ. He never shit on everyone. Therein is a lesson for you.

 

ps BJ if you look whose sock I might be then fuck you!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

That sounds ridiculous, given that you know no one here knows who you really are, and really doesn't care.

 

Besides, whose honor are you defending? That of Happy Jack or your previous nom de plume(s)?

 

 

There is a person behind Bus Driver. There is a person behind Happy Jack,

Yeah, but I'm not continually trying to prove myself on an anonymous Internet forum.

That is your choice.

Conversely, your choice is to be an insufferable and pompous ass. And, when you get called on your shit, you get nasty and defensive.

 

Trust me, you are impressing no one. No one is fooled by your schtick. You could get along with folks quite easily.

 

But, you choose not to. That is your choice. And, it is sad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

you are in for a big surprise if you think this is the end of simple jack. He is as welcome as Herpes, and of similar lifespan.

Yeah, he's slunk off to lick his wounds for a bit. But he'll be back in a few hours or a days, pretending all of this never happened.

Flick Him Off! Flick Him Off! Flick Him Off!

 

 

If you ignore his fundamental violation of the TOS by showing up here after he's been banned, he actually hasn't broken any rules that merit suspension or banning.

 

 

 

Posting here is a privilege. Jack has abused his. Flick him on principle alone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

you are in for a big surprise if you think this is the end of simple jack. He is as welcome as Herpes, and of similar lifespan.

Yeah, he's slunk off to lick his wounds for a bit. But he'll be back in a few hours or a days, pretending all of this never happened.

Flick Him Off! Flick Him Off! Flick Him Off!

 

 

If you ignore his fundamental violation of the TOS by showing up here after he's been banned, he actually hasn't broken any rules that merit suspension or banning.

 

 

 

Posting here is a privilege. Jack has abused his. Flick him on principle alone.

 

 

While I agree with you in principle, in practice it's easier to track the cockroaches when they aren't hidden in the walls.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No Flicking of the Dum Dum! Who else provides such a never ending supply of doofusitude of which to mock? He's a gold mine and he's here. Why mess that up? The last thing we would want is for him to go somewhere else, especially now that we can hang every bad thing that happens like an albatross around his little No.2 pencil neck.

 

That reminds me. This thread needs music.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, let's not get all flick happy.

If you guys want to just have a sounding board of like-minded people, what's the point of having a forum?

 

I come here for entertainment during my work breaks. Without a good mix of smart, stupid, irrational, left, right and goofball players it would lose the entertainment value.

 

Sol should be flicked if he keeps up with the MASH comments though. My box set still isn't here and it's just plain mean.

Thank god I have my Blazing Saddles DVD.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, let's not get all flick happy.

If you guys want to just have a sounding board of like-minded people, what's the point of having a forum?

 

I come here for entertainment during my work breaks. Without a good mix of smart, stupid, irrational, left, right and goofball players it would lose the entertainment value.

 

Sol should be flicked if he keeps up with the MASH comments though. My box set still isn't here and it's just plain mean.

Thank god I have my Blazing Saddles DVD.

 

Actually, I don't want ol' ferret face flicked. I agree with Sol Johnson. But it sure is fun to make him sweat it a bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want Hapless flicked - we need some stupid as a counterpoint.

 

The moronic clowns like Shitbreath and Fuk Tup Joe who never post anything but stupid pics & GIF's can go though

 

The sooner the better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want Hapless flicked - we need some stupid as a counterpoint.

 

The moronic clowns like Shitbreath and Fuk Tup Joe who never post anything but stupid pics & GIF's can go though

 

The sooner the better.

 

If I purged people purely on the basis of being pointless shitposters, Team Red would be unfairly and drastically reduced in numbers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I don't want Hapless flicked - we need some stupid as a counterpoint.

 

The moronic clowns like Shitbreath and Fuk Tup Joe who never post anything but stupid pics & GIF's can go though

 

The sooner the better.

 

If I purged people purely on the basis of being pointless shitposters, Team Red would be unfairly and drastically reduced in numbers.

 

 

A lot of them self deported already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I don't want Hapless flicked - we need some stupid as a counterpoint.

 

The moronic clowns like Shitbreath and Fuk Tup Joe who never post anything but stupid pics & GIF's can go though

 

The sooner the better.

 

If I purged people purely on the basis of being pointless shitposters, Team Red would be unfairly and drastically reduced in numbers.

 

 

A lot of them self deported already.

 

 

I guess they got tired when people weren't swayed by their firm convictions and well reasoned arguments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They'll be back. Either crowing about the one good thing Trump will do (getting his clothing line made in America) or under a different name raging against their previous Messiah.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They'll be back. Either crowing about the one good thing Trump will do (getting his clothing line made in America) or under a different name raging against their previous Messiah.

 

Perhaps. I've got Coors Light PMing me cheery thoughts in the convo thread I started when I called him out for shitting on my kids. But he's not posting here. I'm not sure he liked my last suggestion that he make sure to buy some new sheets so he's ready for the next lynching.

 

It's been quiet without Happy Jackov's insane rambling, lies and spinning. There seems to be almost...conversation...on occasion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Pub's didn't want that gun check bit because none of them would be able to pass the background check.

 

I doubt the coal tailings will be much of an issue because the mines are mostly closed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seared on both sides, and spit roasted. Stick a fork in him as I believe he is done.

 

I think he's likely booking tix for his next cruise o' shame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey JB,

Serious question: Are you still confident about your claims that the US government has checks and balances to keep Trump under control?