posted on September 30, 2000 10:50:31 AM new
Spaz:
That is the point I was trying to make. Does "member" refer to a "name" or does it refer to a "person"? If it refers to a person, then my calling Parrot a jerk is a violation of the CG's. That assumes the Parrot has ever been registered here.
Of course, Parrot would have to own up to the other identity before I could be moderated. It would be worth it . It was inexcusable how he/she tried to use Redhead to extract revenge on others.
Irene
(edited to change "he" to "he/she" )
[ edited by stockticker on Sep 30, 2000 10:52 AM ]
posted on September 30, 2000 10:58:27 AM new
Stockticker,
It was inexcusable how he/she tried to use Redhead to extract revenge on others.
Quite right. But I think it would have been easy to overlook the rantings of a rabid tropical bird, had it not been for the corroborating email Redhead had received from "someone I hadn't heard from in a long while." Someone she must have felt she knew and trusted. When she said, "What blows my mind the most was that some of those involved were stopping by with sweet words of comfort and sending me PM's," I concluded that the correspondent had named names.
posted on September 30, 2000 11:03:34 AM new
Pareau, you mentioned on Maui's thread that you feel I owe you some sort of explanations. What the heck are ya talkin' about?
Are you always this pissy in the morning?
posted on September 30, 2000 11:08:00 AM new
Pareau: I'm not even curious. As far as trust is concerned, e-mails and chatboard postings are a poor substitute for being able to look directly into someone's eyes.
posted on September 30, 2000 11:15:55 AM newPareau, you mentioned on Maui's thread that you feel I owe you some sort of explanations. What the heck are ya talkin' about?
Dearie me, someone needs to worship at the feet of God Caffeine a little longer, doesn't she? I said "You've got explanations to provide, so get over there and quit ducking!" Not for me, but for the general readership.
Here, again, my questions:
----------------------
I don't understand something. The Black Hole has been made nice and safe and secure from prying eyes and misinterpretation, no? Everthing is wonderful in the land of false security, right?
So... why the incursions into other sites now? Is this an orchestrated thing, or a spontaneous foray into the fresh air? Any reflections to offer on the experience of "out of sight, out of mind"?
--------------------------
The bolded question should be the easiest to answer, but honest responses to the others would be appreciated as well.
posted on September 30, 2000 11:21:39 AM new
Irene, looking into eyes is not an option here, and has nothing to do with what I'm talking about.
I'm intrigued by the deflection of the question, though. Here's a key to one of the more malicious REAL, DOCUMENTED acts of recent vintage, and no one seems to want to know who's behind it.
posted on September 30, 2000 11:27:28 AM new
hahaha, you really are just a sniveller with a vocabulary, aren't ya?
I'm not a member of BS anymore. Sorry to disappoint you, but I'm not a disgruntled ex-member, either. I like and/or love the people who post there (or used to).
As far as I know, one need not anchor onesself to specific chatboards just so you can keep your scorecard tidy.
And as for my owing the general readership anything except courtesy, well, I don't see it that way.
You seem to have a keen interest in all things BS, though; why?
posted on September 30, 2000 11:47:52 AM new
LOL! Your future, Pat. We must sit down and discuss that some day.
Pareau,
Everyone knows all about the parrot except you. Now that it's known, and old news, there's only the fun of keeping you babbling your strange and errant suspicions. We're laughing at you.
posted on September 30, 2000 11:50:10 AM new
Pareau, I have nothing to "duck". You seem to see things that aren't there, or to have erroneously attributed to me things you've heard. Everything I've ever had to say about BS, GB, and the assumptions made by people who really don't know what they're talking about may be found at R's and at AD.
And, it appears that you are the one who's avoiding a direct question. I asked you why the keen interest in BS? Avoid it or not. I'd like to think you've got better things to do with your time -- and your mind.
posted on September 30, 2000 11:53:05 AM new
krs said:
Everyone knows all about the parrot except you. Now that it's known, and old news, there's only the fun of keeping you babbling your strange and errant suspicions. We're laughing at you.
Mystery solved now?
------------------------------
"Everyone" knows the identity of the Parrot? That's news to me. I haven't read anyone else say they absolutely knew who that person was. No, the mystery has not been solved.
Would anyone of krs' "everyone" care to say who the Parrot is, or krs blowing smoke again?
posted on September 30, 2000 12:00:07 PM new
The only reason anybody's interested in "all things Bomb Shelter" is because it was thrust in our faces. I didn't give a hoot what happened behind the doors of Fort Gaffan until the disenfranchised started showing up at other boards upset because their friends had banned them for reasons as trivial as "posts infrequently." Or until one of Bomb Shelter's own members launched a vicious attack under the Parrot ID.
I think it's pretty disingenuous to be criticizing pareau or anyone for having an interest in Bomb Shelter when it was you, Bomb Shelterites past and present, and your closed-door world, that brought us to this point.
[edited for a stray word]
[ edited by spazmodeus on Sep 30, 2000 12:05 PM ]
posted on September 30, 2000 12:01:53 PM new
You know, Ken, I'm beginning to suspect this is a simple case of displacement; she wants you all to herself.
posted on September 30, 2000 12:04:45 PM new
But, Spaz, I didn't bring it up here -- you and Pareau did. I don't have any answers for you beyond what I've already posted elsewhere. If you're tired of having this topic "in your face", why do you continue to bring it up?
posted on September 30, 2000 12:05:31 PM newPat, sniveller with a vocabulary...classic PLS.
You've made a new friend, haven't you? Actually, Pareau is the only person I've ever seen post a copy/paste from an AU thread (about two months ago, on AD, and long after the plug was pulled at AU).
posted on September 30, 2000 12:10:39 PM new
Spaz, I think the "out of sight, out of mind" part got to them. One can't overlook the clear signs of oxygen deprivation, either.
posted on September 30, 2000 12:11:41 PM new
I never said I was tired of having it "in my face." I said it was thrust in our faces. And once it was, it created suspicions and and left lingering doubts and unanswered questions throughout the boards. That kind of stuff just doesn't go away, no matter how much you'd like it to.
posted on September 30, 2000 12:17:18 PM new
oh pareau, the thread here says DRYER LINT and now your talking BS which can be taken either way, ya know.
Your just upset you don't know the identity of the talking bird LOL!
plsmith- thats how you spell it! Monsieur Poirot! good one! LOL!
posted on September 30, 2000 12:19:47 PM new
Spaz, Pareau, I have no investment whatsoever in having your "unanswered questions" go unanswered. But the two of you seem to believe I am the one who could answer them for you, and once again, all I can tell you is to read what I've already posted about this elsewhere. I have no "inside information", have no proof who the parrot is, and I'm content to have the subject die because I've already said everything I needed to say when it was in my face. The two of you are welcome to continue in your misguided assumptions about me; all I can tell you is that you're barking up the wrong tree.
(Horrid cliche used just to drive the wordsmiths crazy... )
posted on September 30, 2000 12:19:54 PM new
Hi Pat! I'm here for a few minutes...
Nice topic, dryer lint. Mine is a lovely rectangle, peels right off the lint screen without protest, mostly grayish, but occasionally more vibrant and colorful(depending on the load, I suppose).
The Walrus was Paul...but not the Parrot. Wrong gender.
. It was inexcusable how he/she tried to use Redhead to extract revenge on others.
