I always misrepresent myself in text format. help me understand what I do wrong?

[TBerg]

I absolutly litterally cannot glean any meaning from what you said just now. Its like poetry or a riddle or something. Pretty words but i see no litteral translation.

Scarface is not a word, it is a name. How can one have such a thing as "inner workings of scarface" or "inner workings of john smith". Define the word "scarface" for me, and i will maybe understand the first half of your post.

Life is a riddle. I frequently see no other way of really penetrating it.

Scarface implies previous wounds, still present in certain forms, which we can view in the mirror, if we dare. We might even look into the biology of our scars, enabling us to see the inner workings below the surface of the ego.

 

[Base groove]

I litterally don't know what you are saying half the time (90%).

This is a good one.

 

[Spirit]

This thread has me cracking up. I am not sure someone that is an NT can be so blind about something so easily apparent given all of the contextual reference points within this thread and site.

 

[somfoolishfoole]

Life is a riddle. I frequently see no other way of really penetrating it.

Scarface implies previous wounds, still present in certain forms, which we can view in the mirror, if we dare. We might even look into the biology of our scars, enabling us to see the inner workings below the surface of the ego.

Fair enough perspective (life is a riddle...)
How in hell was I supposed to know you were talking about all that? Did you make up that definition? And now that i understand your original meaning, analysing my "scarface" is pointless for me to ponder on. I simply do not, by a long shot, have the emotional intelligence to analyse my "scarface". I would come up with a new, unrelated theory as to why my scarface is damaged, every time i try to analyse it. The facts are non concrete and it is not even worth trying. I used to come up with something different every time i talked to my councellor because i simply had no idea what the problem was and every guess was a convincing best guess but then next time, the best guess is different.

This is a good one.

That was a lazy correction. It was a contracted version of "half of blah blah, actually, more like 90%

 

[somfoolishfoole]

This thread has me cracking up. I am not sure someone that is an NT can be so blind about something so easily apparent given all of the contextual reference points within this thread and site.

Care to enlighten me? Im clearly oblivious so why don't people just state the obvious thing im missing?

 

[TBerg]

Interpreting and reinterpreting is what psychoanalysis is all about. It is hard for everyone to understand their scars, especially if they are clumsy and forget how they got them. We must just learn to notice.

 

[hurricanejane]

Care to enlighten me? Im clearly oblivious so why don't people just state the obvious thing im missing?

Would love to enlighten you, but clearly my un cultured teen mind has no idea what is going on.
I'm just playing, but lighten up a little and broaden your mind and you'll get it too.

 

[kaelum]

Ever consider that when you write you might be too terse? As in you might have a bias that an understanding necessary for understanding what you wrote---that information is assumed by you to be common knowledge and therefore not needing an explanation, but it might be necessary to explain it when you write. I've had that problem when writing papers, and once a professor told me I was too "elliptical" and made too many jumps in logic for readers to follow, so I started explaining more and got better grades.

 

[Hawkeye]

Class-y.

I see what all went on here now. Solution - put Hawkeye on ignore and ... put somefoolishfoole on ignore. Am I gonna do it? naw.

You two might actually have something in common - in spite of all your jawing you don't actually seem to have any respect for your audience.

I think you've missed the point I was making. Either that, or you're too proud to admit your assumption about the purpose of this thread was wrong.

You've come in guns blazing and completely missed the context. In fact, you've added nothing to the thread other than insults really. Congratulations.

You talk about showing respect, but ironically your posts show what little respect you have for Somfoolishfoole (and to a lesser degree: myself) .

Examples:

Yes dumbass I'm Kuu. I'm Kuu's dupe account and if you tell anybody I'll make you a moderator and resign.

This idiotic thread is still going on. Has he shown any sign of improvement or learning? Is anything to be gained from providing reinforcement? It's called "help me understand what I do wrong" but he's not taking any help. Is it because he's misrepresenting himself or is it because he loves to bask in the attention (cough*, worship)?

"new revelation"

Frankly, I don't care whether you respect me or not, but know this: there is nothing I hate more than a hypocrite.

Don't be that guy.

 

[Base groove]

Guns blazing? I came in here first thing in the morning, had a read through the new posts, as I have been following the thread. Perhaps in your frame of mind I have read the entire thread at a go or hadn't read it at all. I'll admit to skimming his posts a bit and I'll admit you have a good point that I had no good reason to be here and I'll admit that it appears I have imitated Kuu to some extent.

In addition it appears you have openly admitted to baiting me, and now with your strong verbiage you have amplified this discussion to an emotional level when it didn't need to be. I think if you're feeling bitter about something you can find a more constructive way to fix your fucking situation by yourself like a man. That goes for both of you punks.

 

[pernoctator]

it's says help me understand, not help me change

you're too proud to admit your assumption about the purpose of this thread was wrong.

That escalated quickly.

In addition it appears you have openly admitted to baiting me, and now with your strong verbiage you have amplified this discussion to an emotional level when it didn't need to be.

Pretty much. Knock it off, Hawkeye.

 

[Hawkeye]

That escalated quickly.

That's usually what happens when you take quotes from a single person; the context is lost.

The second post is in a reply to the hypocritical post you appear to have disregarded. That post was also having a dig at me...

Pretty
much. Knock it off, Hawkeye.

I like how you tell me and only me to knock it off. BG took it to the next level albeit passively (in his hypocritical post); kind of similar to what BAP does.

 

[Cherry Cola]

Hawkeye you obviously bickered so that you could turn it into drama to prove a point. That's stupid because it wont work when you turn it into drama yourself for everyone to see. It's also childish because why not just be direct instead?

The whole thing stems from your inability to make sense of the situation holistically anyway. Everything this guy writes reeks of narcissism and image building, it's jammed so tightly between the lines that you almost can't see them for it.

What would you think if some other user made several threads for the purpose of discussing him/herself with other people? Because that's what he is doing, the cry for help is just there to serve the purpose of making it work. His first threads had a more domineering tone, but he knows that wont work anymore.

 

[pernoctator]

That's usually what happens when you take quotes from a single person; the context is lost.

The second post is a reply to the hypocritical nonsense being fired at me and Somfoolishfoole. Funny how you didn't quote that.

The "assumption about the purpose of this thread" was in reference to the first quote, which is why I isolated them. Any alleged hypocritical nonsense by other parties is tangential to the fact that you escalated a tongue-in-cheek criticism (complete with wink smiley) to an ostensibly serious accusation (something which I've noticed you doing in the past as well). You were deliberately being indirect so you could "bait" him again with that statement. Knock it off.

 

[Hawkeye]

Hawkeye you obviously bickered so that you could turn it into drama to prove a point. That's stupid because it wont work when you turn it into drama yourself for everyone to see. It's also childish because why not just be direct instead?

The whole thing stems from your inability to make sense of the situation holistically anyway. Everything this guy writes reeks of narcissism and image building, it's jammed so tightly between the lines that you almost can't see them for it.

What would you think if some other user made several threads for the purpose of discussing him/herself with other people? Because that's what he is doing, the cry for help is just there to serve the purpose of making it work. His first threads had a more domineering tone, but he knows that wont work anymore.

I was being direct... Everyone else seems to think so too.

I don't care about people talking about themselves or to themselves. Others on here do it seems... Like yourself for example.

Are you qualified to make such a bold statement regarding his thought processes? If not, kindly be quiet.

 

[Hawkeye]

The "assumption about the purpose of this thread" was in reference to the first quote, which is why I isolated them. Any alleged hypocritical nonsense by other parties is tangential to the fact that you escalated a tongue-in-cheek criticism (complete with wink smiley) to an ostensibly serious accusation (something which I've noticed you doing in the past as well). You were deliberately being indirect so you could "bait" him again with that statement. Knock it off.

Over-analyse much?

Your conclusion is nowhere near accurate.

 

[Cherry Cola]

I like how you tell me and only me to knock it off. BG took it to the next level albeit passively (in his hypocritical post); kind of similar to what BAP does.

Great another dude who think his interpretation of the situation holds prime over any other down to the tiniest level. Yeah he totally took it to the next goddamn level which is automatically renders him the guilty party, it's not at all like you waited in anticipation for him to take it to that there level of nextness[/I, and did your best to bring it forth by provoking him with stupid statements.

Also it's says help me understand, not help me change

^Yeah it's not like there's anything appalling with a guy who claims to want help with his issues, obviously doesn't want to change and is really looking for people to help him masturbate. You may be direct now but you certainly made sure to prepare.

What even is the next level? Where does it start? It seems like a plot device to me.

 

[Cherry Cola]

Are you qualified to make such a bold statement regarding his thought processes?

Yes.

 

[Hawkeye]

What even is the next level? Where does it start? It seems like a plot device to me.

In context, the next level is an emotional level (according to BG).

 

[pernoctator]

Over-analyse much?

Your conclusion is nowhere near accurate.

It's not over-analysis, the connection is obvious. You're the one pretending there is additional "context" that somehow justifies your accusation, yet you continue to be vague about it.

So tell us: What, precisely, was BG's assumption about the purpose of the thread that was wrong?

 

[Hawkeye]

It's not over-analysis, the connection is obvious. You're the one pretending there is additional "context" that somehow justifies your accusation, yet you continue to be vague about it.

So tell us: What, precisely, was BG's assumption about the purpose of the thread that was wrong?

Why? BG has already admitted that he skimmed Somfoolishfoole's posts and that he wasn't really contributing (or words to that effect). Funnily enough this admission is in the very quote you disregarded.

Also it's says help me understand, not help me change

You have merely interpreted the smiley to mean something sinister. That is your fault, not mine.

Check this post I replied to you with yesterday, it's quite relevant:

I don't think this is down to misrepresentation, rather, it's more like misinterpretation.

 

[pernoctator]

Why? BG has already admitted this point. Funnily enough this admission is in the very quote you disregarded.

First of all, he admitted no such thing. He admitted he skimmed the thread, under the assumption that you were referring to something he missed that would have clarified the actual purpose. But we both know you were only referring to your own pedantic interpretation of the thread title, and there was not actually any critical information that BG missed.

Second, you have once again avoided giving a direct answer. I'm still waiting.

 

[pernoctator]

You have merely interpreted the smiley to mean something sinister.

No I didn't. I interpreted it to mean tongue-in-cheek. Read my post again.

 

[Ex-User (9086)]

Care to enlighten me? Im clearly oblivious so why don't people just state the obvious thing im missing?

If you listed all the posts and the content, you would see many similar descriptions and ideas. It is not a matter of being oblivious you place yourself in this oblivion.

Tberg made an allusion of his behaviour being similar to your own. Well not even an allusion, comparison.

 

[Hawkeye]

First of all, he admitted no such thing. He admitted he skimmed the thread, under the assumption that you were referring to something he missed that would have clarified the actual purpose. But we both know you were only referring to your own pedantic interpretation of the thread title, and there was not actually any critical information that BG missed.

Second, you have once again avoided giving a direct answer. I'm still waiting.

Sorry, I realised I said something wrong in my post regarding BG's admissions and edited it.

I haven't avoided a direct answer... I asked why I needed to give an answer.

But since you won't be happy until I give you an answer, here it goes:


Pedantic interpretation of the thread title? <--- It's not a pedantic interpretation at all... It's the literal interpretation...

I always misrepresent myself in text format. help me understand what I do wrong?

This thread was created by Somfoolishfoole to seek help in understanding why he is misrepresented. He even opens with this line:

I always misrepresent myself in a text format. it seems like 80% of the online text-text conversations I have with people, ends in them left feeling jaded towards me. I don't quite understand what I'm doing wrong? Am i too straitforward? too honest?

In no way does he ever suggest that he's going to apply any of the advice given to change/improve his persona. - this is the assumption that I'm referring to.

I have highlighted the assumption in BG's thread:

This idiotic thread is still going on. Has he shown any sign of improvement or learning? Is anything to be gained from providing reinforcement? It's called "help me understand what I do wrong" but he's not taking any help. Is it because he's misrepresenting himself or is it because he loves to bask in the attention (cough*, worship)?

This is why I responded with:

You're falling for the bait. ^^

Also it's says help me understand, not help me change

No I didn't. I interpreted it to mean tongue-in-cheek. Read my post again.

Now who's being pedantic? Anyway, the fact-of-the-matter is that you have interpreted that winking emoticon to mean something more than I did. I was not being tongue-in-cheek about it, so your interpretation is inaccurate. Perhaps I was flirting/politely informing/literally winking as I typed it...

On that note, I'd be interested to hear what you know my baiting comment was about. It's quite abstract, but seeing that you know my intentions down to a "T", you should be able to answer it pretty quickly. No?

 

[pernoctator]

So you are committing to the fact that your second comment was, indeed, referring to the same thing as the first (the assumption that he is intending to apply any of the advice). In other words, the two statements I quoted were directly related; if that is so, then what exactly is the "context" that was missing?

No, I don't believe you were being serious the first time. Even ignoring the smiley, and the fact that you admitted to baiting in the very same post, there is absolutely no evidence aside from the thread title that your idea is accurate, while there is plenty of evidence to the contrary in this thread and others. Here is just one example (in a reply to your own post, no less):

Grammar can make a huge difference in meaning on a forum

Ok, I shall attempt better grammar.

 

[Hawkeye]

So you are committing to the fact that your second comment was, indeed, referring to the same thing as the first (the assumption that he is intending to apply any of the advice). In other words, the two statements I quoted were directly related; if that is so, then what exactly is the "context" that was missing?

I never said these posts weren't related. I said the context was lost and the context I was referring to was regarding how it escalated quickly. It was you who claimed the hypocritical stuff (the catalyst*) to be tangential material based on my apparent "bating" of BG. An interpretation which is false irrespective of whether you believe it to be or not.

No, I don't believe you were being serious the first time. Even ignoring the smiley, and the fact that you admitted to baiting in the very same post, there is absolutely no evidence aside from the thread title that your idea is accurate, while there is plenty of evidence to the contrary in this thread and others. Here is just one example (in a reply to your own post, no less):

So to answer my question, you don't know what the "baiting" comment was about. Please explain to me how You're falling for the bait. ^^ relates to me bating BG. Not only that, but how is it even an admission I am baiting?

[Note] It has nothing to do with the previous comment about me calling BG "Kuu". That was merely a reference to a trait Kuu had where he'd drop one-liners in threads such as or boring without adding anything productive. I forgot that BG was fairly new and so naturally, that joke was lost on him.

* I don't like hypocrites and BG was being hypocritical with his *lack of respect* comment. As I said earlier:

Frankly, I don't care whether you respect me or not, but know this: there is nothing I hate more than a hypocrite.

Don't be that guy.

 

[somfoolishfoole]

First and foremost, I suck at multiquoting properly, those post links may or may not be correct. I copy pasted many of the start quote *username*/end quotes

I always misrepresent myself in a text format. it seems like 80% of the online text-text conversations I have with people, ends in them left feeling jaded towards me. I don't quite understand what I'm doing wrong? Am i too straitforward? too honest?

Issue at hand

He's asking for help, but what he really wants help with is getting pointers on what he could do to help him with his image.

Incorrect assumption at my intended message/meaning

Are you qualified to make such a bold statement regarding his thought processes?

Only person who seems to be seeing the rediculousness of accusations held against me

Quote:
Yes.

Astonishing ignorance

He asks the questions in a manner made to seem genuine so that people will put effort into their answers, but then he can't contain himself anymore.

Stop reading between the lines, there is nothing there. I say everything as I mean it, in a litteral form. I don't understand the world of subjectivity, therefore I do not use it. If something is NOT written in plain words, it is not a part of the intended meaning.

Are you qualified to make such a bold statement regarding his thought processes?

Quote:
Yes.

Everything this guy writes reeks of narcissism and image building, it's jammed so tightly between the lines that you almost can't see them for it.

If I were acting narcisistic, and someone accused me of it, I would concider their words, evaluate the level of truth, and admit it if I saw myself to be, indeed, narcisistic. I don't think you guys understand me at all. I speak very plainly. I always say exactly what I mean, and I am quick to admit to faults that have been illuminated to me. If I deny any accusations held against me, it is not my pride talking, it is me, telling you that you are wrong.

Are you qualified to make such a bold statement regarding his thought processes?

Quote:
Yes.

Great another dude who think his interpretation of the situation holds prime over any other down to the tiniest level.

OHHHOHOHHOHHHHH!!! AND CHERRY COLA TAKES THE BIGGEST HYPOCRITE OF THE UNIVERSE PRIZE!!!!!!

 

[TBerg]

We frequently engage in debates in order to convince ourselves of the goodness of ourselves. Could this be what the OP is currently doing? Or are we condemning the OP for being a neophyte? Is the neophyte trying to use this as training ground for his persona, or is he even a neophyte? Is he just trying to gain acceptance?

 

[Base groove]

So to answer my question, you don't know what the "baiting" comment was about. Please explain to me how You're falling for the bait. ^^ relates to me bating BG. Not only that, but how is it even an admission I am baiting?

[Note] It has nothing to do with the previous comment about me calling BG "Kuu". That was merely a reference to a trait Kuu had where he'd drop one-liners in threads such as or boring without adding anything productive. I forgot that BG was fairly new and so naturally, that joke was lost on him.

Well now this is interesting. So you're telling me that when you said "you're falling for the bait" you weren't referring to the "Who do you think you are" comment, even though I had replied directly to it... "Oh, it was a joke and you didn't get it because you're new." In reality ou were actually talking about some hidden bait in foolishfoole's post; a trap set by the man who follows up to explain that there is never any subtext in his writing and he's as sensor as it gets. That guy baited me into calling you a dumbass. OK I get it now.

I suppose if it's true then it changes a few things.

With regards to the respect/hypocrisy thing ... so you've made your case that I should not advise others on matters of respect and manners if I'm not going to be respectful of others myself, particularly because you hate it? Uh ok fine, but , WHY? agian? Does it make the quality of the advice any lower? No.

Well at any rate I suppose we're all ready to move on from this so yeah I get it now.

 

[paradoxparadigm7]

Die, thread die!!!

 

[Base groove]

Die, thread die!!!

This would do no good. You have to aim a few steps ahead or else you're always one step behind (i.e. aim for the heart)

 

[paradoxparadigm7]

It's quite the conundrum...if I post, I continue the thread.

 

[Hawkeye]

Well now this is interesting. So you're telling me that when you said "you're falling for the bait" you weren't referring to the "Who do you think you are" comment, even though I had replied directly to it... "Oh, it was a joke and you didn't get it because you're new." In reality ou were actually talking about some hidden bait in foolishfoole's post; a trap set by the man who follows up to explain that there is never any subtext in his writing and he's as sensor as it gets. That guy baited me into calling you a dumbass. OK I get it now.

I suppose if it's true then it changes a few things.

With regards to the respect/hypocrisy thing ... so you've made your case that I should not advise others on matters of respect and manners if I'm not going to be respectful of others myself, particularly because you hate it? Uh ok fine, but , WHY? agian? Does it make the quality of the advice any lower? No.

Well at any rate I suppose we're all ready to move on from this so yeah I get it now.

Your conclusion is close, but not quite right. My bait comment was quite abstract in that you setup a scenario where you were in effect baiting yourself. You were reading into the topic deeper than intended and became irritated when you saw no improvement in his posts based on the help provided.

My winking comment was to provide a hint as to why, but this was seen as a tongue-in-cheek remark for some reason... (perhaps I was too abstract?)


Pernoctator of course, knows me better than myself and will say this is some complete and utter tripe I've just made up. If that is the case then:

Spoiler

Care box |_| <--- pernoctator, look how empty it is.

You called me a dumbass because the joke was lost on you. It had nothing to do with baiting/trolling.




In regards to mentioning the hypocrisy comment again, I was explaining the relevancy of it to pernoctator because he didn't think it was. It was.

As for the actual comment you made, the topic wasn't the key point, only the hypocrocasaurus-rex.

Spoiler

Somfoolishfoole's last quote conclusion made me laugh.

...But yeah, I'm done.

 

[pernoctator]

I never said these posts weren't related. I said the context was lost and the context I was referring to was regarding how it escalated quickly. It was you who claimed the hypocritical stuff (the catalyst*) to be tangential material based on my apparent "bating" of BG. An interpretation which is false irrespective of whether you believe it to be or not.

The confusion here all stems from the fact that you assumed my "escalated" comment was in reference to the discussion as a whole, when I was actually specifically contrasting your two statements. In my eyes, you said something as a joke, and in your next post repeated it as a serious argument. As in, "I'm so hungry I could eat a horse," followed by "Where the fuck is my horse?" That escalated quickly.

You see, I assume you're a reasonable person. So when you look at someone who says "help me understand what I do wrong" and say that he is not suggesting that he wants to change, because the sentence technically could mean that, I assume you're nitpicking for fun, and you don't actually believe it. And I don't have a problem with that. What I do have a problem with is the second post, which appears to be turning the joke into drama just to be a dick. BG and CC apparently saw it the same way.

Anyway, even if you maintain that you were never joking, at this point it's obvious that you were wrong, as OP has made it clear that he does want us to believe he is trying to change (claiming that he has "revolutionised" his attitude).

 

[redbaron]

Well that escalated quickly.

Somfoolishfoole isn't my favourite poster, but he's relatively harmless. He doesn't go around into other threads and make a nuisance of himself, and in the threads he does make, he makes himself the focal point and whether or not it's genuine, he puts on the appearance that he's at least trying to understand other people's point of view - even when they don't paint him personally in a favourable light.

I don't really care that he makes a lot of these threads and doesn't, "make an effort to change" - like it's some violation of some unwritten rule for someone to hold values and ideas we don't personally like without making an attempt to change.

 

[Jennywocky]

It's quite the conundrum...if I post, I continue the thread.

Life's full of hard choices.

 

[Hadoblado]

Fool is my favourite poster hands down. Prime mover of forumINTP 2014.

I'm glad to see him return.

 

[somfoolishfoole]

We frequently engage in debates in order to convince ourselves of the goodness of ourselves. Could this be what the OP is currently doing? Or are we condemning the OP for being a neophyte? Is the neophyte trying to use this as training ground for his persona, or is he even a neophyte? Is he just trying to gain acceptance?

Its the second one !! U hit the nail on the head. I was going to bring this up at some point in different words but it slipped my mind. I have always suppressed my Fe and si was never very developed, but now im coming out of the closet so to speak and trying to buff out my personality, and lets face it, blundering through and learning things the hard way is faster and simpler than... Not doing so.

A feelings etc neophyte is me, deal with it bitches .

Well that escalated quickly.

Somfoolishfoole isn't my favourite poster, but he's relatively harmless. He doesn't go around into other threads and make a nuisance of himself, and in the threads he does make, he makes himself the focal point and whether or not it's genuine, he puts on the appearance that he's at least trying to understand other people's point of view - even when they don't paint him personally in a favourable light.

I don't really care that he makes a lot of these threads and doesn't, "make an effort to change" - like it's some violation of some unwritten rule for someone to hold values and ideas we don't personally like without making an attempt to change.

This. I never stoop to insults, even when they are thrown at me. Not on a moral basis, just that insults are condusive to nothing.

It is genuine.

 

[somfoolishfoole]

Fool is my favourite poster hands down. Prime mover of forumINTP 2014.

I'm glad to see him return.

Thanks hah. I guess i do do plenty of the shit stirring, even if unintensionally.

I was wondering where u were hado

 

[Turniphead]

I tried reading the second page of this thread, but my head figuratively exploded and I need to have a lie down.

 

[TheScornedReflex]

Fuck everyone else. Free ball this shit. Let misinterpretation rule the day! If you don't care about how people view you, why should you care about misinterpreting yourself? You're too good for everyone. They should be trying to understand you, not the other way around. The world is all in your head. Make of it as you will.

Fight the power! Fuck the world! Hail Hitle... Umm, imma go now.

 

[Base groove]

You called me a dumbass because the joke was lost on you. It had nothing to do with baiting/trolling.

Wrong. You should not have edited this bs into your post as before you did that I was ready to drop it. Now you're baiting me again, just like you baited me before, whether you deny it or not.

I called you a dumbass because "who do you think you are?" is not much of a presentation for a "joke" (news flash dumbass, it's not a joke) and what's more is I understood the comparison perfectly clearly (why do you think I included that last facepalm - another Kuuism), and in the broader context of the whole forum you have been on my case a bit regarding my behavior and its relationship to mods, such as your posts in my thread: sexified mods. So dumbass, in case you weren't clear, that is why I called you a dumbass - for trying to take another stab.

As explained by Pernoctator - it appears that what escalated quickly was your own personal involvement. So you have betrayed yourself by getting too serious about your own joke; it is pretty well objectively clear now that it was flame bait and personal. So why are you denying it? Why don't you just assert yourself and take a stance?

The entire foundation of your past arguments was based on the presupposition that I didn't understand the joke. This is not the first time you have underestimated me. I'm referring to the recent event where you mentioned you didn't think I had read the thread or other threads related to the incident of Fukyo v. Lightspeed but I have.

You might have a full house but I have four of a kind. I just didn't show you my last card right away.

 

[redbaron]

OooOOoo, four of a kind. You're in a real pickle now Hawkeye!

 

[Hawkeye]

OooOOoo, four of a kind. You're in a real pickle now Hawkeye!

Indeed. I guess I only have myself to blame on how people interpret my posts. I'm now presumed to be on troll-mode 100% of the time. It is funny how certain people are of my apparent hidden agenda.

Also, the fact that he read the lightspeed thread makes him more wrong on the matter because he's admitting he knew the context (previously, he had benefit of the doubt on his side) . As I said, the pm was posted merely to take the piss out of lightspeed. Even Fukyo admitted this. The lack of punishment debate is not relevant here.

As for the dumbass remark, his response does not invalidate my point that the joke was lost on him.

I find it hilariously ironic that he accuses me for not being serious, yet takes my comment seriously.

Oh well...

 

[Base groove]

he accuses me for not being serious, yet takes my comment seriously.

Oh well...

Prove it (I did no such thing).

 

[Hawkeye]

Prove it (I did no such thing).

Read your previous post. <--- not being tongue-in-cheek.

To be more clear - the bit where you took my lighthearted joke to be an objectively (purely subjective) clear, flame-baited personal stab at you.

More to the point, if I wanted to attack you on a personal level, I assure you, I'd be very direct about it . When it comes to insulting people, i don't hide behind vague interpretation.

I also think you took my posts in the sexified mods thread personally when I was generalising. You assumed I was implying you were brown-nosing which was not the case. I even told you why I posted what I posted later in the thread. So you've had a grudge all this time?

 

[Brontosaurie]

i think you guys are being way too sociable.

 

[Hawkeye]

According to my profile, my MBTi is MONG... Sounds about right.

 

[Jennywocky]

I just want to see this beautiful travesty hit 100 posts.