Originally posted by Very RustyYou have simply dodged what I said. Which was: I have always defended her right to free speech even if she uses it to abuse people. So where is my hypocrisy on this issue?
I caught up and passed you some time ago. You just haven't caught on yet.
Originally posted by FMFIt wasn't me that turned anything into a "silly drama". You're the one that initiated this whole "drama" by sharing an innocuous PM you classified as "threatening and abusive" thereby creating a drama.
Nope. My eyes are wide open. I am fully self-aware. I know exactly what I did and why. And I would do it again. The reaction, once people like you decided to try to turn it into a silly drama, has been entirely predictable. I am not blind, blinded, blinding, blinder, or blindsided in any way.
Originally posted by josephwNope. You haven't been following. I received the ridiculous message and showed it to some people. I informed Suzianne; there was no need to keep it secret from her. I asserted the principle that I had followed on what was a short and undramatic thread on the Site Ideas thread. That was the end of it as far as I was concerned. The "drama" has been manufactured by the likes of you and chaney3 and Very Rusty and robbie carrobie and sonhouse. There was no "drama" until they started their mish-mash of name calling, hyperbole, parody arguments and what not.
It wasn't me that turned anything into a "silly drama". You're the one that initiated this whole "drama" by sharing an innocuous PM you classified as "threatening and abusive" thereby creating a drama.
Originally posted by FMFIn a way you have a point, but the "drama" asserted itself with this:
Nope. You haven't been following. I received the ridiculous message and showed it to some people. I informed Suzianne; there was no need to keep it secret from her. I asserted the principle that I had followed on what was a short and undramatic thread on the Site Ideas thread. That was the end of it as far as I was concerned. The "drama" has been manufactured by ...[text shortened]... a" until they started their mish-mash of name calling, hyperbole, parody arguments and what not.
Originally posted by Suzianne
If I let my sub go, it'll be because of the way they've allowed the obvious collusion going on in the clan system to trivialize possibly the best part of this site.
In reply to which you said this.
"The twenty or so regulars here who read that PM you sent me (I passed the contents on to them) might find the gap between what you are saying here, now, and what you said in that PM, rather curious."
From page one of this thread. So who is it that actually "manufactured" the drama in this thread. It was you.
2 edits
Originally posted by josephwDon't be silly. The point was that she was either lying for effect in her message to me or she was lying for effect on this thread. You got no ridiculous name calling and highly personalized insults for insults' sake from me; that all came from the people I mentioned.
So who is it that actually "manufactured" the drama in this thread. It was you.
The fact that Suzianne was lying for effect in one of two instances was not "manufactured" by me; me pointing out that she was lying for effect in one of two instances was not something being "manufactured". It was real and I pointed it out. It was true that the people who had seen the message would have seen that she was being deceptive. I didn't make that up.
The silly, relentless "drama" of epithets and clunky arguments and general silly banter was manufactured by others, not by me.
Originally posted by josephwThe above statement was true. I knew it was true. Suzianne knew it was true. The people who'd seen her ridiculous message knew it was true. Any honest onlooker will now realize it was true.
FMF: "The twenty or so regulars here who read that PM you sent me (I passed the contents on to them) might find the gap between what you are saying here, now, and what you said in that PM, rather curious."
In the meantime, there has been a gamut of insults and insinuations, regarding my sexual orientation, my honesty, my supposed proclivity for sexual harassment, my supposed moral repugnance, even the possibility of my "victims" committing "suicide" has been alluded to, people have made stupid comments about violence and violent revenge, about stalking, and about my mental health, and so on and so forth. Seitse even referred to me as Gary Glitter, which is of course his 'code' for calling me a child rapist ~ a kind of humour I take it you find "courageous", if your past comments are anything to go by..
The hand wringing and clamour has been utterly demented. And I did not initiate any of this "drama", josephw. I simply stated something that was true.
1 edit
Originally posted by FMFYou couldn't get any traction from this the first time you presented it, and you're not getting any traction from it now.
Don't be silly. The point was that she was either lying for effect in her message to me or she was lying for effect on this thread. You got no ridiculous name calling and highly personalized insults for insults' sake from me; that all came from the people I mentioned.
The fact that Suzianne was lying for effect in one of two instances was not "manufactured" ...[text shortened]... of epithets and clunky arguments and general silly banter was manufactured by others, not by me.
I gave you reasons why both are true, but you snowplowed over it.
There was no "deception", and you're not going to gaslight your way out of it. The drama is all yours, as usual.
Originally posted by SuzianneI found it deceptive. And I still do.
You couldn't get any traction from this the first time you presented it, and you're not getting any traction from it now.
I gave you reasons why both are true, but you snowplowed over it.
There was no "deception", and you're not going to gaslight your way out of it. The drama is all yours.
Originally posted by FMFHow can you possibly say that? The thread titled @Suzianne was started by divegeester. If anyone is responsible for dramatizing it's him and you.
If you read this thread and the concurrent one with your name in its title, you'll find the "drama" is all yours, and chaney3's, and Very Rusty's. and robbie carrobie's, and sonhouses.
You both made an issue out of virtually nothing, and now you have the gall to accuse others of making a "drama" out of something the both of you originally laid out in this forum?!
You have an obtuse way of perceiving what the rest of us see clearly.
What's more is the post you made above. It's practically indecipherable.
Originally posted by josephw
FMF: "The twenty or so regulars here who read that PM you sent me (I passed the contents on to them) might find the gap between what you are saying here, now, and what you said in that PM, rather curious."
"The above statement was true. I knew it was true. Suzianne knew it was true. The people who'd seen her ridiculous message knew it was true. Any honest onlooker will now realize it was true."
That entire post is completely obfuscatory and without relevance to the simple discussion being made on this page.
Originally posted by FMFHow on earth can you think to blame others for what you and divegeester started? That's totally weird man!
If you read this thread and the concurrent one with your name in its title, you'll find the "drama" is all yours, and chaney3's, and Very Rusty's. and robbie carrobie's, and sonhouses.
You and divegeester have been pegged and you know it.
Originally posted by josephwYou're clutching at nonsense straws. The thread entitled @Suzianne was started by divegeester and it was about the seemingly mindless use of thumbs down which he thinks is down to Suzianne and which she has never denied. Read it. It was chaney3 - a chip-spitting apologist for Suzianne's abuse of the web site's message facility who sought to prolong the same old same old "drama" and subsequent insults with "She deserves an apology from your boyfriend."
How can you possibly say that? The thread titled @Suzianne was started by divegeester. If anyone is responsible for dramatizing it's him and you.