War Room Lounge v65

Should the Lounge rule over the hearts of men?

  • Hunto rules over the hearts of men and he's not finished yet

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    1
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Btw, google imaging “Bernie dolls” found me this Massachusetts seamstress.

12049590_851339218296066_7331270501401765865_n-1000x724.jpg
 
Everyone knows your history with Inga. You were called out on behavior by more than me

At this point you are just full of shit. I'm done arguing with you about something everyone knows you are guilty of

My "history with Inga" = I think she's a very dishonest poster. Just like Cubo or Anung or you. Lots of bad posters in the WR, and lots that I respond to a lot more than I respond to Inga. I might also note that she had a sig attacking me, while I have never given her that much thought.
 
I'm just gonna have to respectfully disagree with you regarding that.


I do have a short fuse with those who throw out insults. Most everyone knows that.

Jack would attack a poster for absolutely no reason and he was called out by others for it. I would never expect him to admit to it....or admit to being wrong about anything
 
You're making stuff up. Go through my history. You won't be able to back your story up.



Trotsky's one of the best posters here, while SBJJ once wanted to bet his account that no one in the Obama administration used a surname, and regularly throws the most vile insults and false accusations against people for simply daring to disagree with him.
You've been called out on it so much that you cant even tag her anymore because you abused it. You need to go back to the drawing board buddy, nobody is falling for it anymore.
 
My "history with Inga" = I think she's a very dishonest poster. Just like Cubo or Anung or you. Lots of bad posters in the WR, and lots that I respond to a lot more than I respond to Inga. I might also note that she had a sig attacking me, while I have never given her that much thought.

Yea bud. No one fucking believes you.
 
You've been called out on it so much that you cant even tag her anymore because you abused it. You need to go back to the drawing board buddy, nobody is falling for it anymore.

I think he actually believes the bullshit he spews
 
You've been called out on it so much that you cant even tag her anymore because you abused it. You need to go back to the drawing board buddy, nobody is falling for it anymore.

I get some people whining when I don't tag and some people whining when I tag. It's clear that you guys will just look for something to whine about when someone sees through your bullshit.
 
You've been called out on it so much that you cant even tag her anymore because you abused it. You need to go back to the drawing board buddy, nobody is falling for it anymore.

That’s right, he’s actually not allowed to tag her. That’s hilarious. What a creep.
 
I get some people whining when I don't tag and some people whining when I tag. It's clear that you guys will just look for something to whine about when someone sees through your bullshit.
Go home and be a family man
 
I think he actually believes the bullshit he spews

It’s part that but also the fact he is paid to post here by certain people.
 
Yea bud. No one fucking believes you.

What's to believe or disbelieve? What I said is objectively true. If you want to bet that Inga isn't in the top 10 of posters I've responded to in the past (you pick the time period), I'm down.
 
98% of my posts in the other thread have been about grilled cheese sandwiches. I was merely asking a question regarding that incident.

he tends to lecture others about morality, but says horrific fu*king shit himself. Fu*k him...but out of respect to you, I'll back off on this.

similar to how I'm playing nice with Fawlty.

Thanks

Btw

Multi grain, butter, Swiss cheese, Prosciutto
 
The fact that SBJJ wanted to bet his account that no one in the Obama administration used a surname is objectively true. As is the fact that he throws out vile personal attacks and false accusations when you disagree with him. That Trotsky is one of the best posters here is something that I think most intelligent people would agree on after reading the group for a couple of weeks. I don't really know what your issue is with him, but when you call people "Marxist scum" or "trash" or whatever, you don't make the case, and you cause normal people reading to have doubts about your judgment.

Sucks you attacked me for defending that great poster Trotsky
 
What's to believe or disbelieve? What I said is objectively true. If you want to bet that Inga isn't in the top 10 of posters I've responded to in the past (you pick the time period), I'm down.

Lol

Yea, that makes sense.

We are talking personal attacks, not simply responses
 
Lol

Yea, that makes sense.

We are talking personal attacks, not simply responses

If you're talking about "stalking," I'd think the volume of replies (or mentions--we can do that, too) would be what we want to look at. I don't deny that I think Inga is one of the most dishonest posters here. But I'd bet that I've mentioned you more often than her, and I don't care much about you either.
 
Do you want to lose another bet to me?

You seem to not understand the difference between post responses and responding with a personal attack

And lol at lose another bet. You sound like a child thumping his caved in chest with his tiny little fists
 
If you're talking about "stalking," I'd think the volume of replies (or mentions--we can do that, too) would be what we want to look at. I don't deny that I think Inga is one of the most dishonest posters here. But I'd bet that I've mentioned you more often than her, and I don't care much about you either.

No. By stalking I mean FLAMING for no apparent reason. As for not liking either of us....cool, I'm in good company. You could always just put us on ignore like the other 138 already there

Now take a deep breath and realize this all started because you attacked me for DEFENDING Trotsky.

Funny shit
 
You seem to not understand the difference between post responses and responding with a personal attack

And lol at lose another bet. You sound like a child thumping his caved in chest with his tiny little fists

Ah, so why don't you make the accusation clearer? When you say "stalk," you don't mean follow around and harass or anything like that. You just mean I occasionally respond to her and don't think highly of her character. Guilty as charged, if that's it.
 
No. By stalking I mean FLAMING for no apparent reason

Now take a deep breath and realize this all started because you attacked me for DEFENDING Trotsky.

Funny shit

And you define "flaming" as what? Saying that I disagree with her or that I think she's dishonest. Again, I agree with that. Likewise, I think you're wrong about almost everything and are of very low character.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top