A suggestion regarding discussions revolving around abortion

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

  1. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    If you'd noticed, I was actually addressing someone else. Not you.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Good.

    Now was it a personal attack against you? No.

    But for some bizarre reason, you kept trying to force it onto yourself, no matter how much you were ignored.

    How nice to see I have such influence over people I have never spoken to or even know. Really..

    But you might want to double check with Neverfly there. He keeps telling us he asked you to join to prove that he was not lying. I don't know. Might be best if everyone is on the same page. Just for clarity's sake.

    That particular line may have been addressed about you. Not to you. There is a subtle difference.

    The reason is simple. It can get quite messy when one person in the middle of a "crapstorm" starts asking others to join in for whatever reason.

    You'll need to ask Neverfly who else he was running to. He said it was 10 people at one stage.

    You will have noticed that I did not address you personally until you were virtually flinging yourself in my face. To which, I then politely asked you a few questions about your posts and then left you alone. Until you again kept flinging yourself, saying I was being rude to you, when in reality, I wasn't even saying a single thing to you. Now, had I been attacking you, I'd have addressed you directly. Since my first post to you was fairly straight forward, asking you a few questions about your opening posts, and then silence.. how exactly was I "attacking you"?

    Your reasons for joining are your own. Thus far we have Neverfly's version, your version because I apparently asked you to join and your other version is because things on this forum interest you. Pick whichever one you prefer. It is of little concern to me. What I do not appreciate is when someone who does not know me or this forum, who then comes flinging themselves into something that did not concern them, comment on things they had no idea about and accuse of rudeness and abuse towards them when they weren't even being addressed. You do not know me. I will tell you now. And others on this forum who know me will verify. I am not a nice person. I don't do "nice". If you are going to yap at me like a demented chihuahua, I will treat you like a demented chihuahua.

    Now, you have specifically sought me out for your own personal reasons. Do not now complain about being abused or attacked when you have launched at me first.

    My words were quite clear. They stand as they were written.

    Should I have typed it for his benefit? I'm sorry, how exactly should I have typed it?

    There appears to be quite a bit of confusion about why you joined. Here he says you were introduced on the "basis of this spat". Here he again reiterates it is to prove that he had not lied. And even here, he says it as well. Again, I would suggest you sort that out with him. Not with me.

    Yes.

    If I were you, I would be asking him why he has placed you in this position.

    Here is how things work.

    You accused me of being a bad moderator. I asked you to show proof of your accusation against me. You had several options in how you could have backed up your claims against me. You could have utilised the search function. You could have gone back a few years in the Human Science forum and viewed what decisions I made there. You could also have asked other members and/or moderators and administration about my 'performance' as a moderator.

    If you make a claim, it is up to you to back that up. Your inability to do that is not my problem or concern. I am still waiting for your proof by the way, especially in light of your reasons.

    That is a comfort.

    I am not here to pander you or be nice and cuddly with you. If you do not like how I address you or anyone else, I would suggest you stop yapping at my heels demanding attention constantly and then whining about verbal abuse. My tone to you and Neverfield was not abusive. It was sarcastic, I will freely admit that. Now, you may view sarcasm as being verbal abuse, that's all very well and good for you. But I tend to become sarcastic when I am faced with individuals who need to rally the troops to discuss or debate any issue. My sarcasm will come to the fore when I am faced with an individual who simply appears to have no idea what the hell he really means.

    If you feel I was verbally abusive or if you felt you were "assaulted" by me, you are free to PM the moderators or the administration with your complaint. I would also suggest that you stop throwing yourself in front of me begging to apparently be assaulted and then complain about it.

    The difference between Neverfly and Lightgigantic is that one did not run home to mummy with ugly crying because he didn't like how someone was talking to him. In short, lightgigantic is an adult who can throw it back as good as he gets and he does so often. Mind you, seeing that you appear to be saying that Neverfly may have been assaulted by me verbally, I will be sure to use very small words with him with lots of pretty colours and pictures to make sure that he finds a comfortable happy place, lest he pees his pants in fear in fear of an "assault".

    Had you noticed, Lucy also pointed out that he was contradicting himself and also asked for clarification?

    I am sorry. Next time I will be sure to include the obligatory "LOL" and 'ehugs'.

    I was not the only person who queried your comments. Several did and most have yet to receive a response from you.

    My comment stands. It was taken in light of your other comments about how consequences should be suffered as she opened her legs as well.

    But lets look at your comments about giving the father a say in whether she has the child or aborts it. At the end of the day, you cannot force a woman to carry a child if she does not want to carry it. It goes against her personal freedoms and her personal choices. I do not think my question to you in regards of all the comments you had made up to the point where I did respond to you were ridiculous, because your statements and claims thus far were quite outrageous.

    Because I found your argument to be hypocritical. Why do you deny one group of father's the right but not another. Why do you think a woman has the right to abort a life in one or two circumstances, but not another. You had claimed that women would apparently often change their minds after having had the child after they had put it up for adoption.

    I happen to work for the Child Support Agency, as a legal advisor and am often faced with father's who will use every excuse under the sun to get out of supporting their children.

    And no, you made no "flippant" remark about what I had said. I did ask you to answer my questions before I was to discuss anything else with you on the matter. Which you had not done and still have not done so.

    Heh!

    That was in response to this comment by you:

    That was your in first ever comment on the forum. So how exactly had I started to twist what you had said? Not to mention after that first post by you, you then went on and on at me until I finally responded to you a couple of pages later. Did you expect any less? I treated you as you treated me.

    *Snort*

    Not a double standard at all. You failed at sarcasm. I am sorry if that hurts your feelings. But you entered the fray with both bee bee guns blazing. You should not accuse others of double standards if cannons are fired in your direction in response to your constant little jibes and attempts at sarcasm.

    I was the one who referred to you as his little attack dog. Not Lucy.

    I did not goad Neverfly to get you to join or to respond. Neither did Lucy. You did so of your own volition, which you freely admitted earlier on in this post. When Lucy advised you that your course of action was not the best one or the wisest, you persisted. And you kept on persisting. The spat was between Neverfly and myself. But you forced your way into it and even after I ignored you repeatedly, you kept pushing for a response. Well now you are getting the response you deserve.

    I'd have never thought it was a touchy subject. Thank you for enlightening me.

    I have been a member here since 2001. This is not the first or the last abortion thread I have participated in. Abortion rears its ugly head on this forum every few months. Now, consider how long I have been a member here. I guess one could say that I have developed a very thick skin where the subject matter is concerned. I have friends who have had abortions and if I was to get that emotional about it each time, I would not be able to participate in any threads on the subject. There are very few things that I get emotional about on this forum. Those who know me well will be able to tell you which ones really get under my skin. But abortion? No. The only emotion I was feeling in my spat with Neverfly was amusement at the way he was bouncing all over the place with his beliefs.

    I was actually talking about VI.

    Had you read the thread up to that point and beyond, it would have been fairly obvious who I meant. It was reiterated here again by me.

    Very diplomatic.

    Hopefully you're better at 'not responding back' than Neverfly was.

    Toodles now.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Last edited: Apr 9, 2010
  2. Guest Guest Advertisement



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

    Messages:
    9,879
    Oh petal! We weren't goading you we were taking the piss! *shakes head back and forth* Please don't tell me that you think we care that much about you? We're large game hunters, so we wouldn't be out goading you. You on the other hand reminds me of a rabbit that doesn't know when to leave alone a sleeping tiger. Too fucking bad for you sunshine

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Of course I responded with 'whatever' and told you you behaved like an ass! You are new here so I will entertain this long enough to show you exactly what you did that made you look like an ass.

    Neverfly and Bells are having a long row, most leave them to hash it out for themselves. There are those who think Bells is handling this perfectly, just check post #117, there are those from the anti abortion position that backs Neverfly, so be it. Its normal around here to back another who supports your own point of view but at least they have been active in that discussion for some time now. You come in with a post count #1 and after maybe 3 or 4 posts decides that Bells is this that and the other when you had absolutely no personal engagement with her in which she was either aggressive or rude.

    You then come here to this thread and post the following (just an excerpt):

    "Once again, I see I must defend myself against the abusive Bells. I did and do find you manipulative, twisting peoples words, which I see that I am not the only one who has seen this on this site."

    Now why would that be? Why, if you are so interested in abortion, leave that thread to come here and post the above?

    You want to know why I intervened? Its because you who have been here long enough to be only a zygote took it upon herself to not only accuse Bells of all and sundry, when she had barely even responded to you, without it ever occurring to you that none of this was any of your business and had nothing to do with you. As she said she hadn't even said 'boo' to you. You then had the audacity KNOWING NOTHING OF THE SITE OR ITS MEMBERS to glibly assume you know her standing in this community and what others think of her posting style. That to me just makes you an arrogant ass. You also assume that Bells and I are 'friends', so if I had done the same with Tiassa or Sam, which I would have, you would also in your own naive way assume they too were my friends. LOL! Your assumptions make an ass of YOU!!! Now all the rest about attack dogs or whatever have absolutely nothing to do with me so again LEARN TO READ A POST, LEARN WHO ITS WRITTEN BY AND TO WHOM ITS DIRECTED TOWARDS, TRY AND UNDERSTAND ITS CONTENTS AND CONTEXT. Then maybe you can ascribe the comments to the right people and not look even more like as ass.

    You are new here, instead of checking out the different forums, learning how this place works, who the members are and what they are like you jump straight into someone else's battle and then take umbrage when I come along to give you an ole fashioned sciforums beat down with all the added expletives.

    Now before you put on your little armor & blunt blade to go out and fight like a good hobbit why don't you try and learn the features of a post. You made comments after one of my quotes and then went on to say this:

    'Truth of the matter Bells. This is a touchy topic etc etc'

    Now it is helpful if you indicate when you have stopped referring a post to me and have started comments addressed to another, for example @Bells or Bells: (insert comment)

    One more thing, you made a comment in a love thread directed to another poster but the comment he made was in 2002, that was 8 years ago so don't be surprised if you don't receive a reply. Check the date of a post at its top right hand side. This way you also don't make the mistake of answering posters who may no longer be members. The poster you directed the comment to is still here but I doubt he is going to check back on a thread started in 2002 for added comments.

    But just in case you feel you haven't received a proper sciforums welcome I have composed this for you:

    http://www.grapheine.com/bombaytv/illustrateur-uk-4696e971f525413be87604cace427144.html
     
    Last edited: Apr 10, 2010
  4. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575

    heh
    fishwives works too


    so ahh
    yellow

    you cute?
    its tradition around these parts for the bitches to post pics
    the hotter the better

    thanks

    /pant
     
  6. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Yellow Jacket Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    198

    LOL! You ask Neverfly. I'm sure he has an opinion. Besides, apparently my opinion means crap, LMAO!!
     
  8. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575

    just to give you a heads up, yellow, on what i get off on......

    /drum roll


    /smirk
     
  9. Mrs.Lucysnow Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,879
    And so does his. He's what many call around here a fly, others just refer to him as the 'yapping pomeranian' so much so that he's been on my ignore list for well...years, which means none of his posts ever appear on the screen. Looks like your in real good company pet.
     
  10. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    So how's that going for you?
     
  11. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575
    wow......yellow!
    you gotta be the cutest and hottest chick ever to grace sci

    /pant
     
  12. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575

    terrible really
    3 infractions and a warning
    i am on my best behavior

    oh
    who shot that arrow?
    you?

    /smile
     
  13. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575

    great survival instincts and strategy, dearie
    wild hyena indeed

    oh
    wait
    you prefer sleeping tiger, dont you?
    you big game hunter you

    /snicker
     
    Last edited: Apr 10, 2010
  14. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    No I hunt with my teeth.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  15. PsychoTropicPuppy Bittersweet life? Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,538
    Well, it has come to my attention that mordea likes to play it down to gender issues. Odd..isn't it?
     
  16. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    37,884
    How so?

    Odd in what way?

    Or maybe that's the wrong question. Rather, it doesn't seem particularly unexpected. Mordea is a staunch defender of empowerment majorities.
     
  17. PsychoTropicPuppy Bittersweet life? Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,538
    Odd in that way, that Psychotropicpuppy, who rarely follows users' activities, has come to such a quick conclusion.
     

Share This Page