A suggestion regarding discussions revolving around abortion

Discussion in 'SF Open Government' started by mordea, Apr 4, 2010.

  1. Neverfly Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,576
    Actually, that won't work. I know from being new and trying to post links.

    She must FIRST remove the http://www. from the front and then paste it.
    I sent her a message telling her this.
    She said she's off to bed.

    Lucysnow: Your link leads to the Heya Guys thread.
     
  2. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    Of course she is.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  4. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Neverfly Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,576
    It's four am where she is. Cut the crap.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Correction: Was near 5am. My bad.
     
    Last edited: Apr 8, 2010
  6. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Mrs.Lucysnow Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,879
    I know I know I posted the right one in post # 100. This is the right one

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=100777

    If you read through it you will see that I and Kira among others are going on about this Jesse being a sock pocket before the poor guy even has a chance to introduce himself

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    But we guess he's been here in the before time, in the long long ago

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  8. Mrs.Lucysnow Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,879
    No she's not she's hanging out in the music and intelligence thread.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  9. Neverfly Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,576
    Ohh... I thought it was a link to where Bells clarified her intent on Mods checking IP in the Abortion thread.
     
  10. Mrs.Lucysnow Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,879
    No No No. It was an example of how someone new can be accused (sometimes correctly) of being a sock pocket.
     
  11. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,397
    This thread no longer seems to be about mordea's sexist suggestion. Time to close it?
     
  12. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    I'm still awaiting clarification.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  13. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    And plus we are still dealing with "emotional" people in regards to the subject matter.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  14. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    Well the cat is out of the bag now, isn't it?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    I mean lets look at Yellow Jacket. I have apparently been very rude to her and responded to her in a ridiculous manner. So much so, that she apparently has to defend herself against me. As funny as batshit as that is in and of itself, when one considers what I have said to her, you have placed her in a very bad position.

    Shall we look at my responses to her?

    http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2516112&postcount=404

    http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2516312&postcount=432 Granted, I laughed a bit at her here, but seriously, what else could I have done?

    http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2516396&postcount=73 When she flung herself into something that did not even concern her.. Which she admitted herself to having been mistaken.

    http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2516425&postcount=86 The accusations are flowing. Now, she has joined this forum and pretty much from her second post, was insulting and abusive. I've never even seen this person in my life. I do not know her. She has then taken it upon herself to then comment on my moderating skills.. When she was not a member here when I was a moderator.

    Even more amusing, she gets offended when I respond to her in kind, in that here is a woman I have never spoken to before, except maybe once or twice in the abortion thread, who has completely missunderstood what I was discussing with you and immersed herself in something that did not concern her at all. Apparently my asking her what in the hell she was on about was rude.. Not only were we not discussing her, but I had barely spoken to her. This is after she has said that I have been rude to her and I asked her to substantiate that, and she was unable to. She went on the attack and I was very very polite to her. And the response?

    Let me put this nicely to you Neverfly. I would strongly advise you to call off your little attack dog. I can assure you, she will come out of it worse off than I will.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  15. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    Mods always check IP addresses. Always.
     
  16. Neverfly Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,576
    You may try to claim otherwise later... But you are now clearly and directly calling me a liar.
    At least some people are capable of doing that.

    She is not my "attack dog" to call off.

    I am convinced now that Lucysnow was incorrect. You had called me a liar when I said other people were following along disgusted by your behavior.
    As you are doing so now.

    No one could convince me that you are not calling me a liar after THAT ^ commentary. Now matter how coy you play yourself off to be.

    Well, you're right. I did place that girl in a very bad position. I should never have asked people to demonstrate that I was not a liar. And now she's stuck arguing with you in that same unwinnable fight-- and I have no idea what she will do.
    If she backs down from you-- you will claim that as "proof" that she was my attack dog.
    And if she continues to fight you- you most likely will do to her as you have done to me. Which isn't fair to her, who was stepping in to show that I had not lied.
    It's my fault- I've learned my lesson.

    You win the argument Bells. You come out the victor.
    I am bowing out of this, now.

    Because I'm tired of it -- but also because "mystery friend/aquaintance/kinda friend/imaginary friend" was correct.

    It cannot be won.

    It cannot because you have no sense of shame. No remorse. You will stop at nothing with your manipulations and thinly veiled accusations.
    You will accept no apology, no attempt at resolution--- You will continue to slander and degrade and feign innocence until the other person finally knuckles under.

    So, My hat is off to you. You are the Winner. I am the loser.
    I retract nothing- I simply bow out. But first-- know this, Winner, no matter how well liked you are on an internet forum... there is ONE person here, at least, who has seen you for what you really are.


    James R: Mordeas commentary, even it it HAD been insprired by Bells, still cannot sensibly be applied to anyone. It is still an illogical claim, the goofiest post I've ever seen. I was mistaken to bring that argument over here. Bells is only one indiviudal and represents only herself.
     
  17. cluelusshusbund + Public Dilemma + Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,985
    I ant read this hole thred yet... but i want to say this now befor it gets locked... i suport Mordia havin this thred whare people can discuss the idea he preposed wit-out him getin a warnin<sheesh>... eh.!!!
     
  18. Neverfly Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,576
    I agree. My apologies to Mordea.

    I think it should remain open as well and I will simply no longer post in it.
     
  19. cluelusshusbund + Public Dilemma + Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,985
    Why not direct this thred bak to the topic insted of Lockin it.???
     
  20. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    37,882
    I think you might be holding a grudge

    Come on, Gustav. Give her a break. One of the things I've enjoyed the hell out of is watching her thrash her opponents in this one. Hell, she didn't just nail Neverfly, but tacked his hide to the shed.

    If you hop back and forth between this and the EM&J thread, at least, you'll see Bells doing something she didn't do when you and I did rounds with her in December and January. And her technique with that is evolving. It's not mine to pat her on the head and say, "Good girl." But she's backing her ferocity with the record, and wasn't that our primary criticism back then?

    What Mordea has done has transformed a losing argument for the anti-choice crowd into a desperate, flailing disaster. And for once, I get to enjoy the spectacle without being eyeball-deep in the muck.

    That's hardly a PR disaster. Rather, it's cause for celebration. Hell, I do more damage to this site's reputation every time I marshal a campaign about anything than Bells has done by bludgeoning the B&P crowd according to their rhetoric.
     
  21. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575
    oh
    i must confess i hadn't read shit
    just assumed more of the same

    apologies bells

    /crawls off
     
  22. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    No. I am calling you an idiot.

    You asked her to join, to post what she thought.

    But lets look at what she she thinks, shall we?

    This was her first post. On topic. Second.. Third.. Now this is where it starts to get interesting... Forth - I hadn't even said boo to her as yet. And she goes right on the attack:

    Now the next few posts involves her finally answering the questions her original posts raised. I still haven't said boo to her. At the time, I must admit I was too busy laughing at the whole sorry mess. But then it gets interesting. I finally address her on page 22. I don't see how I have been rude to her. I thought I was quite polite in addressing her posts.

    But then.. Lets look at her response, shall we?

    Keep in mind, I have not said boo to her since my first response to her.

    Now, she is apparently offended that I dared to question her directly about some of her original comments. Is this suddenly against the rules? I apparently had to "read deeply". Does this mean I should stick my face right up to the screen to "read deeply"? Granted, I laughed. Quite a bit actually, as you can see in my second ever response to her. I asked her to please answer the questions I had asked her because I wanted to clarify certain things before I discussed anything further with her.

    But then, she takes a different tactic. She joins this particular discussion. Now, I have only ever responded to her twice. First time was polite. Second time was with a bit of a laugh and I asked her politely to clarify a few things from her previous posts. And what does she do? She comes out with this. I responded in kind, because by this point, enough was enough. One can only ignore a yapping chihuahua at one's ankles for so long before it becomes tiresome. What made this soap opera into an even more ridiculous soap opera is that I hadn't even been discussing her with you. Which appeared to surprise her.

    And then.. oh and then.. she accuses me of responding to her in a ridiculous manner.

    But lets look at your behaviour in all of this, shall we? After you asked her to join, by our own admittance, you then went on to egg her along. You know, 'just so she knew'..

    Now, can you see why I am not calling you a liar, but calling you an idiot?

    You have placed this poor woman in a very very bad position. She's so busy defending you, she can't even read the posts properly and went so far as to assume I was even talking about her. Granted, one can't really blame her there since you appear to have gone running to up to 10 people to show them just how mean and horrible I have been to you. What in the hell kind of a sissy wussbag are you?

    The result? Well as you can see above, not very good for your friend.

    You might want to tell her that. As one can see from above, she's so busy defending you, she doesn't even know that I wasn't even talking about her. She didn't even know what we were discussing when she launched her other yapping attack.

    No. I was trying to indicate to you that I thought you were an idiot.

    Okay.

    /Pat

    Do you know why you placed her in a bad position?

    You not only showed yourself to be a wussbag by posting links to your friends because I was so bad to you, you then dragged that poor woman to take part in and support your confused idiocy.

    You should never ask other people to prove that you are not an idiot.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Let me clear something up for you.

    Mordea and I go a long way back. A long way. Now, I probably inspire a lot of things in Mordea.. hatred.. want to run people over in the street in rage.. Did I inspire this thread? Possibly. Mordea has a tendency to get snippy when his side isn't doing so well. That is why I like him so much actually. Now, for all of my fighting with Mordea in the past, for all of the knock down dirty arguments we've gotten into, we have always come out of it at the end without either of us looking like you are at the moment. He may have thought I was being emotional, but you.. you took the cake in being emotional in the Abortion thread.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  23. Yellow Jacket Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    198
    Bells, you continue to address me through other's posts even though I did say I was done addressing you. The discussion on abortion has turned to personal attacks and yes I did have an opinion on that. You asked me to join, I did. Not for you, not for Neverfly, because again...I found the topic interesting, the sciforum interesting.
    This is what led me to believe that you were referring to me, hence my silly clarification of MY REASON I joined. Yet, you say you weren't referring to me. Who then? Who else joined upon your invitation that needed your clarification? I'm the only one we are aware of that joined. I did clarify my reasons for joining again because there were others here that can only go off YOUR judgement and already you were painting me in your light. Sorry I felt I was being attacked. Just like you have your own personal feelings, so do I. And although Neverfly has stated that he THOUGHT I joined to simply demonstrate he had not lied, I had my own reasons.

    Here is a perfect of example of you reading what you want.
    You seem to reiterate him incorrectly for your own benefit. He did say, "I thought", but you fail to recognize what he was trying to say so it benenfits your claims. It's kind of like the radical Christians whom take a few verses in the Bible to use to their own benifit, completely ignoring the real meaning of what was being said in the entirety of the verse.

    So here we are at post #61. If others would like to see how you and him kept referring to me, it continues until I address it at post #71

    Now as far as me, once again i will explain myself, commenting on you being a moderator, I WAS under the false impression that you are still a moderator. That was my fault. I did apologize for that. Now, I also asked you to provide me with examples of how well you conducted yourself, seeing the only thing I have seen is you tearing things up in here. Most would jump at the chance to show the positive things they have done. Instead you told me to go around digging for negative things. I wasn't interested in the negative. In all due honesty, I would have apologized for my opinion. If provided examples. I'm just not being petty enough to attempt to go look for the bad. Just show me a few good, which isn't too much to ask and I'd be good with that.

    Now, why do I have such an opinion? I will provide the reasons. This isn't Neverfly's influence, this is mine, a 5 minute outsider looking in. I wasn't digging. It is plain to see. Here we go:


    You speak like this to others:


    These were just a few, there were so many to chose from!

    I work in the mental health field. These tactics you use, often extrememly sarcastic (which you yourself have freely admitted to me) are considered a form of verbal abuse. What you use is countering, a dominant response towards what you feel is your adversary.You use more of a covert approach. Covert verbal abuse uses hidden aggression involving subtle comments, more of a low key sort of thing. You are also a master of trivialization, which is difficult to detect and usually done in a sincere manner. Perhaps you are not aware of this, many people don't even know they do these things or will see it as a form of abuse (verbal). But to those who aren't used to these things do feel assualted verbally, whether it be minimal or great.

    Mind you, I wasn't only noting your responses to Neverfly, but noted lightgigantic was having the same problem as Neverfly in regards to your posts towards them.


    http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2515718&postcount=310


    This as all before I joined, this is from me reading back.

    http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2515760&postcount=338 ......another example of others noticing your tactics before I joined.

    http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2515570&postcount=297.....again here

    I find it intersting after several pages of you telling Neverfly he wasn't clear, Lucysnow ,after reading figured out what he was saying here:
    http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2515760&postcount=338
    Yet, here we are STILL, while you continue saying he didn't clarify, calling him an idiot, and so on. It has become personal and has nothing to do with abortion any more.


    Now, as to your first response towards me, you opened up with:


    A statement like that automatically sets a persons defensive mode up one click. You kind of go "Uh oh."

    Then you say in response to one of my statements with:
    Who in their right mind would say that to begin with? DUH! Two consenting people having sex is two people having sex! Why or how is there a fault? Why would we blame one person and not the other for having sex? It had nothing to do with what I said in reality. I had said this:
    "Because a woman decided to get all hot and heavy and enjoy having sex and then OOPS, she gets pregnant.....it gives her the right to screw over the father in his choice if he wants to raise the child?"
    Let me see, I see nowhere's where I said it is the womans fault they had sex. We were talking about RESPONSIBILITY for our actions and ALLOWING the father to have a SAY and you pulled it out of context and went into left field.

    Also I said "OF course in the case of rape or medical ememrgency, then the father shouldn't have a choice or fight the decision" You're ridiculous response is this:


    My two responses here? 1)Why should I respond to that at all?
    2) Are YOU pro- life or pro-choice? If you are not being just annoyingly sarcastic here for what purpose I don't know, then maybe you should clarify your position.


    Another sweet, unsarcastic comment you made to me was:
    Yes Bells, there ARE father's in our country who do take care of their children. I am positive if I made some flippant remark about your country you would be all over that! I'd like to thank you for your kind remarks of the responsible fathers in my country.

    And then you proceed to tell me :
    So, therefore, seeing you already started to twist what I said slightly and using sarcastic remarks towards me, I decided that you shouldn't be subjugated to my idiocies.

    AND @both you Bells and Lucysnow:
    I decided to use the same sarcastic attitude and tone as Bells has towards me and others as a little experiement. Lucysnow replies with this :
    So why am I an ass for acting like Bells but she isn't for acting like herself? Kinda hypocritical or perhaps just a double standard. Take your pick.

    I can also see how the two of you kept goading Neverfly to get me over there to respond to you while I was off doing my own thing. Lame. If I was his "attack dog" as you two like to classify me as, I woulda been there. He can fend for himself. As I can for myself. And yes, it was 5 in the morning where I was at, tired and looking for a more peaceful area before I went to sleep for a few hours. Were even immature enough to find out where I was in the forum. LAME!!

    Truth of the matter Bells. This is a touchy topic. There are only 2 classifications to take a stance on, but many feel a mixture of feelings and ideas. Really, perhaps radically, might I suggest there be a 3rd yet to be named side to the Abortion arguement. The third would consist of similiar opinions in the prolife stance, but also agree under certain circumstances that abortion should be OK in the prochoice stance.

    Here I go. Yes, Neverfly was emotionally involved, as he did state many times and even aplogized many times for. For you to say that you felt no emotion during yours and his debates, that would have to be a lie. It takes two to tango and for the two of you to post as many posts towards each other the way you have, you would also have to have emotion involved in some shape or form, surpressed or not.
    Yes, i will say it again, Neverfly was sarcastic as well and emotional. The difference is that he admitted it. You have also claimed abuse towards you as you have done the same to others.
    Post 291 (You were referring to yourself here)
    SO, should we invalidate your feelings of abuse as you have done others?


    At this point, all anyone can do is agree to disagree and move on to a new topic.

    So now I have stated all I am going to say about these matters. Have fun picking this apart, I am sure you won't be able to resist. You are the "gotta have the last word" type of person. Enjoy it, because I assure you, no matter how much you twist or whatever it is you do so well, I will NOT respond back. Again, ENJOy, like a pack of wild hyenas.

    And in your words:
     

Share This Page