Do another one.
Who Posted?
- Thread starter chrysostom
- Start date
Do another one.
aCultureWarrior 1,348
noguru 621
alwight 293
Town Heretic 187
Wile E. Coyote 128
Angel4Truth 120
Thunder's Muse 119
Eeset 110
Arthur Brain 98
Daedalean's_Sun 94
I like to show who has posted in that thread
and
it is the main reason I started this thread
noguru 621
alwight 293
Town Heretic 187
Wile E. Coyote 128
Angel4Truth 120
Thunder's Muse 119
Eeset 110
Arthur Brain 98
Daedalean's_Sun 94
I like to show who has posted in that thread
and
it is the main reason I started this thread
Letsargue
New member
keypurr 1,315
oatmeal 968
Bright Raven 727
Lazy afternoon 671
jerzy 598
Wile E. Coyote 571
glorydaz 571
Apple7 435
lifeisgood 324
God's Truth 306
enough said
oatmeal 968
Bright Raven 727
Lazy afternoon 671
jerzy 598
Wile E. Coyote 571
glorydaz 571
Apple7 435
lifeisgood 324
God's Truth 306
enough said
Squeaky 4
resurrected 1
rainee 1
Totton Linnet 1
bybee 1
zoo22 1
Bright Raven 1
keypurr 1
I said,
he's baaaack
just to say hi to rainee
thanks rainee
resurrected 1
rainee 1
Totton Linnet 1
bybee 1
zoo22 1
Bright Raven 1
keypurr 1
I said,
he's baaaack
just to say hi to rainee
thanks rainee
False Prophet
New member
I need to post, so here I am!
resurrected 145
chrysostom 100
zoo22 87
annabenedetti 83
Town Heretic 71
noguru 36
Christ's Word 36
they got one banned
just two more to go
chrysostom 100
zoo22 87
annabenedetti 83
Town Heretic 71
noguru 36
Christ's Word 36
they got one banned
just two more to go
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
Because I disagree with you and told you why? That's sad.
zoo22
Well-known member
what is sad is that you had to actually ask me
if I thought it was staged
if I thought he was an impostor
when
the prospects of either had not even entered the thread
you brought them in
thanks a lot
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
YOU brought them in in YOUR link.
If you didn't believe these things you shouldn't have posted it. It can only lead one to think you approve of the content.
I'm beginning to think you didn't read the article before you posted it. But I did. Because you posted it.
is that the new standard?
you can't link to anything unless you approve of its contents
no thank you
I'll pass on that one
do I have to now make a disclaimer somewhere?
what about misrepresenting what is contained in a link?
zoo22
Well-known member
But you brought them in. Not anna. You're the one who posted the link.
You ignored any discussion about it.
I asked you if you meant it as a legitimate source or not, and you wouldn't answer.
If you post things, expect that people will respond.
Did you even read the article before you posted it? I don't think you did.
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
Is the new standard posting a link and then not wanting any challenge to it?
I misrepresented nothing.
You've twice misrepresented me.
it was an interesting article
and
anyone can read it to see what it says
and
I am not interested in arguing with you or zoo what it said
and
I do believe both you and zoo misrepresented it
zoo more so than you
and
I did consider it an insult to have to comment on the impostor and the staged part which you did misrepresent
Wile E. Coyote
New member
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
Neither of us misrepresented it. Not zoo, not me. My original post is there from this morning proving exactly what I said and how I said it.
I consider it an insult for you to imply that by my civil disagreement I'm trying to get anyone banned or that I misrepresented the info for the link.