Thread style

lumberjim;379346 wrote:

I will determine who i make threads about, Nancy.

That’s not my name, but good try.:comfort: Go change your tampon, get me a cup of coffee, and start a thread about Bruce, ya beeyotch. :stickpoke

lumberjim;379346 wrote:

And if i do it, it won't be veiled in some stupid assed question that a 7 year old could see through.

It’s called subtlety, something you don’t often use when posting. I was making sure that my understanding of a phrase was the same as most peoples’ understanding of the phrase. I considered that maybe I was the one who was wrong. My question accomplished a couple of things.
- It reassured me that I had a correct understanding of the phrase.
- I caused someone to go back and re-read the phrase, and acknowledge that the phrase was misread.
- It allowed everyone to save some face.

I think your response probably would have been something like “ I said this to somebody, and they thought I called them a name – what an asshole! Cock!” I didn’t go there. You see it as a veiled stupid assed veiled question. I see it as getting my information in line before making an assertion.

If you had gotten your information in line, maybe you wouldn’t have called my thread stupid assed, and I wouldn’t have to explain it to you as though you were a second-grader. [/Bruce, Radar, Rk, Merc, UG]

PS

Spexxvet;379252 wrote:

That's not my style. Maybe LJ will do that - D'oh, I don't see that happening.

is not determining who you make threads about.

cock!

:dedhorse:

I gotcher thread style right here.

i use subtlety all the time, ya thick fingered nose picker. you're just too dim witted to catch it. dim witted to catch it. dim witted to catch it.

lumberjim;379744 wrote:

i use subtlety all the time, ya thick fingered nose picker. you're just too dim witted to catch it. dim witted to catch it. dim witted to catch it.

You think I'm dim witted?

I get my boxer shorts at K-Mart in Cincinnati.
Gotta get my boxer shorts at K-Mart.
K-Mart!
Boxer shorts. K-Mart!

uh, ok...

never seen "Rainman"? The dimwit that repeats everything... repeats everything, repeats everything...

lumberjim wrote:

And if i do it, it won't be veiled in some stupid assed question that a 7 year old could see through.

spex wrote:

It’s called subtlety, something you don’t often use when posting. I was making sure that my understanding of a phrase was the same as most peoples’ understanding of the phrase. I considered that maybe I was the one who was wrong. My question accomplished a couple of things.
- It reassured me that I had a correct understanding of the phrase.
- I caused someone to go back and re-read the phrase, and acknowledge that the phrase was misread.
- It allowed everyone to save some face.

i was talking about this thread you started about jinx. too subtle for ya?

what are you trying to say, Flint? Lassie fell down the well? She needs our help? lead the way, girl!

lumberjim;379957 wrote:

i was talking about this thread you started about jinx. too subtle for ya?

No, too vague.

lumberjim;379957 wrote:

i was talking about this thread you started about jinx. too subtle for ya?

Do you think I should have started a thread titled "Don't trust that asshole Jinx! I PMed her and she blabbed the contents to the general forum. She has no honor"? That's not my style, but do you think that would have been a better way to handle the situation?

Surely the best way to handle the situation is never to say anything in private that you wouldn't also say in public.

If, however, you choose to confide in a dwellar and that dwellar chooses to blow your confidence open...well than you trusted the wrong person. Don't trust them again. It doesn't require a board wide argument about it (imo).

DanaC;380148 wrote:

Surely the best way to handle the situation is never to say anything in private that you wouldn't also say in public.

If, however, you choose to confide in a dwellar and that dwellar chooses to blow your confidence open...well than you trusted the wrong person. Don't trust them again. It doesn't require a board wide argument about it (imo).

It was the first time anyone had ever betrayed my confidence on line - I learned the hard way. I didn't want to start a board-wide arguement. I wanted to know if betraying a confidence was standard procedure at the Cellar.

::PUTS ON HIP WADERS::

Generally? I'd say not. I haven't experienced it in here myself. Eleswhere yes, but not here. I guess it depends on the nature of the confidence as to whether or not it's something you can genuinely guard against. If you have shared some part of your life story in confidence and that is spread, I'd say you got stung badly and there was nothing you could have done to prevent it other than be a better judge of character, and who after all can be said to have flaw-free judgement on that score?

If, however, you shared an opinion about someone else and that was the confidence which was broken, then it was avoidable by not saying anything about someone that you would be uncomfortable to say to that person's face.

I don't know what the confidence was which was broken.

lumberjim;380102 wrote:

what are you trying to say, Flint? Lassie fell down the well? She needs our help? lead the way, girl!

:lol:

If you have a "problem" with a message board, you're doing it wrong.

*sycamore stumbles out of bed*

Shit...what time is it? 20 after 10...gotta be at work at 11.

*reads this thread a couple of times*

Man...I was having some really fucked up dreams last night. Now I get here and it's like a continuation of the dreams!

I need some breakfast...

she revealed the fact that he sent her a pm -asking her not to be mean to him anymore, the little dear. i can see why he was so upset. did I call him Nancy yet? cuz......Nancy!

Flint;380183 wrote:

If you have a "problem" with a message board, you're doing it wrong.

It's a learning process, like everything else

Your face is a learning process.

lumberjim;380185 wrote:

she revealed the fact that he sent her a pm -asking her not to be mean to him anymore, the little dear. i can see why he was so upset. did I call him Nancy yet? cuz......Nancy!

Liar.

Flint;380193 wrote:

Your face is a learning process.

So's your butt.

Flint;380193 wrote:

Your face is a learning process.

now THAT is subtlety



srsly

Spexxvet;380195 wrote:

Liar.

Mook

lumberjim;380201 wrote:

Mook

There's the sublety that I've come to expect from you. And the constructive exchange of information. Unfortunately, it doesn't make your statement any truer.

wang

[COLOR="White"]...[/COLOR]

spex wrote:

I didn't want to start a board-wide arguement. I wanted to know if betraying a confidence was standard procedure at the Cellar.

Then why didn't you ask that in the first place? I know we haven't really had much interaction, but it did look like a cheap shot after the "rest of the story" came out. Not that I care, I've given and received plenty myself.