SpuriousMonkey's Forum

[S.A.M.]

I already posted spurious comments but here is the thread
http://spuriousmonkey.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=130&highlight=

The lack of transition is due to ToR's posts being deleted by her/admin, I don't know which.

 

[Bells]

The point is not what they said about me I could care less. The point is that you guys knowingly made a sockpuppet just to piss me off. Sam as a Mod
let that go why? because spurious is her friend and I was not......And bells I beleive you are also a member there.......so you have read everything there as well too, this is no news to you either......i wish I was a mod then I could let neitzchefan or maybe Oli or somebody I know, create a puppet to fuk with members I don't care for either. The thing about me is that I don't need to do that because instead of talking behind your back or doing such tactics
I have the balls to just tell you what I think to your face! Just Like I did Sandy and whoever else.

I would think the members here would find it about ODD that MODS here seem to be defending their behaviour of making sockpuppets just to piss other members here off, while letting other members here in on the big joke.

I am sorry. You are assuming that I actually read the thread you mentioned and knew about it when the sockpuppet was supposedly created. Fact is, I tend not to read threads when the topic line does not interest me. I only went and checked it out after you started this thread.

Not only did I not talk behind your back, I would have little to no interest in creating a character, specifically to have further contact with you.

Sam as a Mod

Yes. That's right.

However this does not mean that she was in on it, or aware of it as it was happening. After reading through the thread in monkey's forum yesterday, I didn't even see where she participated. So you are accusing her of what again? Of knowing? What if she did not know? I sure as hell didn't. As I said, I tend not to read threads that really aren't that interesting.

You admitted yourself you joined this forum merely to "fuck" with sandy and to abuse her. Hell it was in your first post here. So when some others decided to do the same to you, not by abusing you but by being nice to sandy.. that's what really got to you isn't it? That they were nice to sandy.

As I said earlier. If the thread had been about sandy, you would have joined in and whined about her.

As Sam and TDI have pointed out to you repeatedly, you're doing a great job of advertising their forum. At this rate, the greater majority are going to join monkey's forum just to read the thread in question. Well done.

Like I said if I am that HATED here I will go......you don't have to
play games with me.(sockpuppets)...or spend anytime talking about me in other forums.

Get over yourself. From what I read in monkey's forum yesterday, they wanted to create a character to be friendly to sandy since you specifically joined to abuse her, something you admitted yourself. They said they did not want you to join their forum because they found you too negative. It is a private forum and they are allowed to pick and choose who they allow to join.

And from looking at the dates in that particular thread, it had been dead since June before you revised it. So since that time, they haven't even bothered to think about you. So they had a bit of a whine amongst themselves about you a few months ago. So what? Get over it already. You're acting like a girl in high school who has just found out she is no longer popular. Grow up.

Whatever Sam its obvious you have more say around here and can say whatever
you want about this....Trying to say I am making this shit up or whatever.
I guess the members can beleive who they want.

Where is she accusing you of lying?

But monkey was just given the right to make up a sockpuppet to fuk with me?

And who gave him that right? Are you accusing her of giving him permission to do this? I didn't see that in that thread. Did you? From what I gathered yesterday, they had created a sockpuppet to be nice to sandy. It is telling that you deem that as somehow "fucking" with you. She admitted herself she didn't know until spurious PM'ed her about it afterwards. So unless you have specific proof of her involvement?.. Oh wait. You are only going on the assumption that she automatically knew since she is a member there as well. As she has pointed out to you many times and is fairly evident in that forum, it wasn't about you... you just came into the fray afterwards when they realised they did not want you to join their forum after they saw your behaviour on here and as Sam has said, she found out about it when the sockpuppet sent her a PM and told her that sandy was nice after all.

I could care less....

Ya.. it's showing.

 

[shorty_37]

One_RAVEN called it right on back then!



“ Originally Posted by one_raven
Doubtless.
I called this yesterday.
His/her language has changed completely in one day, his/her knowledge of uses has increased immensely, (s)he was talking about purchasing avatars yesterday, and today is linking to old threads...


My bet is monkey or Satyr, so far. ”

no kidding first he/she wanted to know how to get 20 posts
and was begging absane to give them to him/ or her......

It has learned alot in a couple days...

Its all a pile of shit!

 

[invert_nexus]

Ok. So. The details of the 'experiment' weren't displayed in public. Therefore, we have only Sam's word stating that this 'Ersat' experiment was to be nice to Sandy not mean to Shorty.
I suppose someone could also dig through Ersat's post history to determine the thrust of Ersat's general purpose. Or perhaps there is additional evidence elsewhere? I do seem to recall Spurious mentioning in other posts (although I don't have the slightest clue where) that Sandy wasn't so bad. It was probably as a result of the Ersat Affair that he came to this conclusion.)

Personally, I'm believing Sam. I think that Spurious made Ersat to see what would happen if someone were *gasp* nice to Sandy (I wonder if he was a bootlicker or if he actually debated her? I don't wonder enough to go digging, of course...) I can see Shorty taking offense to this behavior and becoming quite strident thus giving Spurious a very poor opinion of her. It is to be remembered that Shorty did start her career here attacking Sandy.

So. Unless further evidence is provided which can lead one to believe that the purpose of Ersat was to attack Shorty, then my conclusion is that Shorty's claims are without merit.

I would suggest to Shorty that she do some detective work if she wishes to press her claims as so far she has done rather poorly in presenting any incriminating evidence.

 

[S.A.M.]

Not only did I not talk behind your back, I would have little to no interest in creating a character, specifically to have further contact with you.

Amen.

 

[S.A.M.]

Ok. So. The details of the 'experiment' weren't displayed in public. Therefore, we have only Sam's word stating that this 'Ersat' experiment was to be nice to Sandy not mean to Shorty.
I suppose someone could also dig through Ersat's post history to determine the thrust of Ersat's general purpose. Or perhaps there is additional evidence elsewhere? I do seem to recall Spurious mentioning in other posts (although I don't have the slightest clue where) that Sandy wasn't so bad. It was probably as a result of the Ersat Affair that he came to this conclusion.)

Personally, I'm believing Sam. I think that Spurious made Ersat to see what would happen if someone were *gasp* nice to Sandy (I wonder if he was a bootlicker or if he actually debated her? I don't wonder enough to go digging, of course...) I can see Shorty taking offense to this behavior and becoming quite strident thus giving Spurious a very poor opinion of her. It is to be remembered that Shorty did start her career here attacking Sandy.

So. Unless further evidence is provided which can lead one to believe that the purpose of Ersat was to attack Shorty, then my conclusion is that Shorty's claims are without merit.

I would suggest to Shorty that she do some detective work if she wishes to press her claims as so far she has done rather poorly in presenting any incriminating evidence.

Would this help?

I'm so terribly sorry to have unleashed such negative emotions on this interesting forum.

I do not really want to reveal anything bout my personal life but I feel it is time to make a confession. In real life I am a happiness consultant. I say that Sandy is a friendly person because I have been reading some threads on this interesting forum.

I soon came to realize that there was some animosity towards Sandy.

But let me show you an example that Sandy is a kind and forgiving person.

Look at post 51 and 52 in this thread (fingers crossed i put in the proper link)
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=67862

Sandy reacts with much friendliness to another member who previous seemed rather hostile towards her when he appraoched her with friendliness. Or at least I believe so that he was hostile previously from the limited threads I have seen so far.

My friends, there is only one true way to happiness and I do not really want to give away too much because it is my livelyhood, and that is to save your passion for the bedroom! Do not dislike with a person with passion because that person is different.

I am not paid for this but I suggest a simple homework assignment that you may find rather enjoyable.

For today this homework is to try to approach the person you really dislike by addressing them in a polite manner and try to compliment them.

And since I know that you, my friends, are fond of little jokes I will preempt a standard negative response in this therapeutic tool by stating that it is not allowed to say that "there is nothing to compliment in the other person".

I do hope you will all participate in this little experiment.

http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=1439188&postcount=121

 

[shorty_37]

Oh Oli called it back then too....


“ Originally Posted by ersatzscamp
Oh dear, I see that I might have to lead by example. Of course I do not dislike anyone on this forum since I just got here. But here it goes:

Dear sandy, that is a lovely avatar you have there. It makes me feel very pleasant. ”

"Originally Posted by Oli"
There's a few solutions here:

you're someone's sock-puppet taking the piss
you're going to leave
you're going to end up as mad, sad and bad as the rest of us

Other than that, have a nice day.

Why? If I dislike someone (which I don't, by the way, I don't dislike ANYONE), why should I compliment them?

“ Originally Posted by one_raven
Doubtless.
I called this yesterday.
His/her language has changed completely in one day, his/her knowledge of uses has increased immensely, (s)he was talking about purchasing avatars yesterday, and today is linking to old threads...


My bet is monkey or Satyr, so far.

 

[invert_nexus]

Yeah.
I figured "what the hell" and went through Ersatz's short post count and found nothing but respectful and polite behavior. Disgusting. Practically Zak-like. Servile.
Ick.
But, definitely not attacking Shorty.
Shorty loses.

 

[redarmy11]

​

I do though.​

 

[shorty_37]

Ok ok so lets just all assume from now on its okay to make sockpuppets
to conduct our own experiments. We can use our knowledge of what gets under
other members skins and use it against them.

 

[draqon]

thats a huge image

 

[redarmy11]

thats a huge image

There are smaller ones all around it, like tugs around a tanker. Did you miss those?

 

[S.A.M.]

I like the big one. I'm going to print it out for my lab.

Btw, do you remember one you posted some time back with reference to the point? (ie "you are here" and some distance away, "the point") do you remember the link?

 

[invert_nexus]

Ok ok so lets just all assume from now on its okay to make sockpuppets

Make note that the Ersatzcamp sock puppet has been banned. This is SOP for this sort of thing. There was a time when sock puppets were not verboten, but since then (sometime around the kebab affair, if I recall correctly) it has been expressly stated by admin that sock puppets will be banned and if a user uses a sock puppet to circumvent a ban that both accounts will be banned.
Spuriousmonkey is guilty of the former, not the latter. Thus, Ersatzcamp has been permanently banned and the rules are maintained.

Satisfied?

 

[redarmy11]

I like the big one. I'm going to print it out for my lab.

Btw, do you remember one you posted some time back with reference to the point? (ie "you are here" and some distance away, "the point") do you remember the link?

Of course. I am your personal image-monkey:

 

[Deathfromabove]

It's not all bad, You gotta be pretty special for someone to create a sock puppet especially for you. I'm pretty slow is a sock puppet the same as a troll???

 

[S.A.M.]

Of course. I am your personal image-monkey:

Ta, lovie.

 

[invert_nexus]

It's not all bad, You gotta be pretty special for someone to create a sock puppet especially for you.

Then that would be Sandy. Not Shorty.
And, apparently, yes, Sandy was very special.

I'm pretty slow is a sock puppet the same as a troll???

Sock puppets can be used to troll, yes. But not inextricably so.

 

[Bells]

This is getting ridiculous.

An accusation was made that Sam was somehow complicit and so far no proof has been given to attest to this. She has repeatedly stated she was not aware of it until afterwards. I personally believe her. Having just read through the thread in monkey's forum again, there was nothing there about deliberately 'getting shorty'. And there was definately nothing there about Sam being somehow 'in on it'. Unless you have proof of this shorty, you pretty much have nothing. Being a member or a mod on that forum does not guarantee knowledge. Hell I was a member and I never read it until yesterday when you pointed it out in this forum.

I have no access to the other forum, I was banned after posting this thread.
I can longer link anything other then what I put in my first thread and what I read.

Sam and Spurious however who are mods and administrators there can do whatever
they wish the threads or posts in question.

Refer to above. They probably banned you because you did the big 'no no' of advertising their forum on this forum. Monkey's forum has been quite explicit in saying that he does not want his forum to be connected to this particular one.

And it is a private forum where they pick and choose who they allow membership to. It is his right to do whatever he wishes to any thread or post. What's your point? I've had posts deleted there before. You don't see me starting a thread here and whining about it do you?

We can use our knowledge of what gets under
other members skins and use it against them.

So being nice and polite to sandy is getting under your skin?

Honestly shorty. Let it go. After having read through that thread in his forum, it is quite obvious that the sockpuppet was never about you. Save your dignity woman!

 

[shorty_37]

Why was the thread name in Spurious Monkey's site called "Shorty" then.
With the experiment (you all know about) as stated. Why not OLI or MIKE
or ONE_Raven or others that couldn't stand her? As you can see in the Ersat thread.......They all did not like her!
Some ppl were even nastier to her then me. So why was the experiment soley
for my purpose? Why was this not conducted before I even got to SCI FORUMS,
because it seems the hate for Sandy started long before I got here.