posted on December 17, 2001 09:56:31 PM new
Boy, I take a little trip, gone for a day, and look what I find on my return.
uaru,
You'r a sick as they come, and you thank whatever stars have caused you and I to be so far apart because you'd be answering with you teeth if you have any for your doings today.
You say that you lash out because your dirty laundry is brought out here and that's your excuse for the vile things you've said to all of these fine ladies? But they didn't mention your whiney threads over there--I did. And I'll do it again when I see it because to my way of thinking there's nothing worse that a [supposed] man can do in here/there than demean his own in front of strangers. Does your wife know about your threads in Barry's? Do you let her read what you say about her failings? No, you pussy, of course you don't. Or do you talk about her like you do in public chat boards when you're with friends socially, (assuming a lot, I know). Well, that's your business unless you bring it out for the world to see. Once you've done that you've opened yourself to the world opinions of what you do, and from what you've said what you do sucks.
Remember my post some time back in which I said that I don't like mealymouthed jerks? It was you I was referring to. That post probably didn't convince anyone what an #*!@ you are, and I guess I could have saved my breath. All I needed do was take a day in the country and you go and convince them all by your self.
posted on December 17, 2001 09:57:43 PM new
plsmith ~ My what a vivid imagination you have.
Sweetpotato, I think you just have to try to sleep less. These things always just happen when they happen. It's bad if your enemy is quick. It's worse if she is patient.
posted on December 17, 2001 10:15:47 PM new Rawbunzel, believe it or not, I did not make that stuff up. Psychology (even the Freudian kind) makes for fascinating reading. Who knew, though, that Uaru would squinch into it so neatly?
posted on December 17, 2001 10:25:51 PM new
That's not Freudian -- that's the plain truth. Jung or even Perls would agree, had they read our discourse throughout the years.
posted on December 17, 2001 10:32:06 PM new
While I certainly don't condone the language Uaru used, it seems to me that *he* wasn't the one who started this whole fracas. Nor the first to use name calling.
What seems to have gotten HJW & KRS angry in the first place is that Uaru dared to disagree with them. For his pains, he immediately had a totally irrelevant post from another board thrown in his face. Following which he was called a "Piss Ant." When he dared to reply to these, he was further accused of animal abuse in such a way that it made him sound as if he goes out daily in search of poor little doggies mind their own business behind the fences of their yard in order to spray ammonia directly in their eyes with sadistic glee. He then retaliated and it went downhill from there.
Coming home from work and reading this thread I learned a couple of things: name calling is apparently allowed only by a chosen few, that only those chosen few may make personal remarks and that one must never deliver a dissenting opinion or comment to that of the "majority."
Just goes to show you that things do circle around. This all sounds very familiar--remarkably like what things were like when the "wolfpack" ruled the roost.
posted on December 17, 2001 10:48:45 PM new
Oh, come on, Bunnicula. Name-calling is allowed by virtue of the fact that we all have equal access to the bandwidth here. Dissenting opinions or comments take up just as much space (if not more) than agreeing coos and chirps.
How many times do we need to learn that what we say on a chatboard is not about being liked, accepted, etc.? ANYone can say ANYthing they bloody well please -- any time of the day or night. There is no "wolfpack" -- there never was a wolfpack. All there's ever been is a bunch of people who took the postings on this (or any other) board seriously and then got offended when their sentiments were ignored/flamed/moderated. I've lived through all three of those circumstances and I have to tell you that no matter how livid I got about any of the "issues" that surfaced on the OAI boards, none of them altered my Real Life one iota. I'd bet the same is true for you...
posted on December 17, 2001 10:55:33 PM new
Aside that, bunnicula, bull.
There was no disagreement with anything that I had posted--go look again. My post to him was in defence of, or rather, to take the heat off of Helen, whom uaru had already attacked. As he was lecturing her, I thought to say that it seemed that he had taken his role as housewife (meaning that he was being bitchy) to heart. Aren't all housewives bitchy? Whether they all are or not, he certainly was being that way.
So your whole theorum widly and desperately designed to defend that creep is wasted.
Not only that, but there never was a wolfpack here and you have denied the existence of one in different context at another time.
posted on December 17, 2001 11:02:58 PM new
Now then "that's the plain truth. Jung or even Perls would agree, had they read our discourse throughout the years".
Whether or not they agreed, I do. As you go along you sometimes encounter people with whom there's that mysterious communion, and I've known for a long time, Pat, that it exists between you and I.
posted on December 17, 2001 11:26:45 PM newplsmith: no, I don't let it affect my "real life" But I disagree that there never was a "wolfpack"--there was & they ganged up on anyone who disagreed or whom they didn't like.
<br />
<br />
kraftdinner: Hullo. I do drop in all the time, reading threads, I just don't post much here anymore.
<br />
<br />
<br />
krs: Uaru merely made an observation about HJW's post. Perfectly allowable--and which I notice was never addressed. He was called a "piss ant" instead and ordered to leave. You yourself could have addressed the topic at hand--whether Bush is indeed creating a "monarchy" but instead chose to post a personal attack based on a totally irrelevant post from another board. Many people have posted personal items or problems on various message boards--should I now expect a personal attack based not on the subject at hand but rather about something personal I've posted here or elsewhere? Actually, I don't see how such a practice is any better, morally, than Uaru's use of demeaning names. Do you?<br />
edited to replace a "b" with an "m"
[ edited by bunnicula on Dec 17, 2001 11:35 PM ]
posted on December 17, 2001 11:30:54 PM new
hahaha, God, what new divilry is this???
Ken, you are one of the few people who make me laugh out loud. Over and over again.
Which is undoubtedly why I love you...
edited to add: Bunnicula, I was either away (not reading this board) or oblivious to the wolfpack of which you speak. Even so, I *still* say that we all have equal access to the bandwidth here (or anywhere) and can post whatever we please. Ad nauseum. New day -- new wolfpack. Depends on the subject being dissected and the available trolls/toadies at hand. It's not REAL. Period.
posted on December 17, 2001 11:44:03 PM new
Bunni,
"should I now expect a personal attack based not on the subject at hand but rather about something personal I've posted here or elsewhere?"
Yes, I'm afraid so. At least you should since having told us about the mule.
But you said "What seems to have gotten HJW & KRS angry in the first place is that Uaru dared to disagree with them"
and that presuppposes that I was angry about being disagreed with when in fact I had not been. Now I could have addressed the topic at hand? I brought the topic to bear, need I do more?
The plain fact is that uaru's post was flat insulting to helen in his persistently smarmy way. It was obviously meant to do harm by that insult and was not simply a contribution to any discussion at hand. Read it and say that you believe otherwise and I'll send you to the dogs. That creep never offers considered opinion--he only spews out his sleazy wisecracky jerk comments when in response to helen, myself, or any other who he doesn't abide. Well, the hell with what he abides or prefers. He dishes crap up and then whines if he gets crap back.
posted on December 17, 2001 11:51:17 PM new
And Pat; "hahaha, God, what new divilry is this???"
What can I do? I agree with you, and you suspect me. It's only a matter of timing that we have been kept apart, you know. I've thought of it often, how it would be--you and I. Generally I know that it would be a great one--fiery, fun, and warm; people would smile when they saw us. Maybe short lived though, and maybe not.
posted on December 17, 2001 11:56:04 PM new
Ken, once before we leave this earth we will have it off. My birthday is in April. Plot a course.
edited to add: Twinsoft, you have yet to state that you understand the string being dangled before you. Until you do, you're not allowed to swoop in with vagaries like "hypocrite"...
posted on December 18, 2001 12:00:44 AM newRead it and say that you believe otherwise and I'll send you to the dogs.
Start sending. Uaru's first post to this thread was no more insulting than many another I have seen--he merely gave his opinion that HJW's post would cause many to roll their eyes. Wow! Such an insult! Yessir, them's fighting words, alright. Smarmy? If you say so.
posted on December 18, 2001 04:23:16 AM new
Oh come now, bunni. You know that no such post can be considerd a separate event. This was a part of a trend, a continuum of increasingly insulting activities by this ineffectual wannabe manipulator who no doubt feels that the sorts of behaviors, demeaning in nature, which apparently gain him his way at home are appropriate as well in the public arena. That post is a bullet in a hateful and driven agenda having as it's hopeful intent the psychological destruction of his chosen victim the poor innocent and lovely Helen. You see here the feeble yet horrific work of a Misogynist Monster!!
posted on December 18, 2001 05:02:17 AM new
No...she is wolfpack elsewhere...I believe jtland here. And a fine poster indeed...I miss here here.
Pat...Freudiam?????????
uaru certainly sank to the lower of the name calling and swiftly...all on his own. His fault...his responsibility...his own doing. Strong woman (women) or weak, there is no reason we need to stand quietly by as he spills his hogwash. I am not even going to guess as his reasoning or his excuses...don't give a damn what they are.
uaru, while Solomon was certainly Jewish...it was his wisdom that was referred to in my comment...sorry I had to point this out...since it was so obvious.
Steve, yep, I've seen name calling on these boards. Not sure what the point is that you were trying to make though...
Heaven help us if Ken and Pat ever do get together...
Please call me Charlotte so I don't have ta change my ID.
posted on December 18, 2001 06:32:03 AM new
Charlotte, the point is, as Bunni observed, you are oblivious to name-calling one one side. There is no response or retaliation. This is part of an ongoing dispute, and both sides are to blame. If you are offended by name-calling, you have a funny way of showing it.
posted on December 18, 2001 07:09:42 AM new
Rawbunzel was NOT part of an on-going dispute, Steve. She made ONE post giving her opinion and was called a whore.
posted on December 18, 2001 07:25:16 AM new
The reason Uaru gives for his lashing out seems to change. Early on, he actually apologizes to everyone (presumably including Helen) except Rawbunzel.
Uaru says (Dec. 17 at 12:19 p.m.) I apologize to those that I may have offended with the exception of Rawbunzel. Actually it I felt it was called for. I don't feel she has the information or experience to evaluate my domestic situation in the manner she did. I wouldn't do it to such a thing and I expect the same of others.
He say that the name-calling wasn't the reason for his outburst (Dec. 17 at 1:34 p.m.): When you entered the dialog you promptly called me a Pompus A$$, that didn't bother me.... Calling me a TWIT is fine, I'll give you that right, but to define the relationship I have with my wife isn't your call.
He called Rawbunzel a whore, not because of any on-going dispute with Helen or KRS, and not because of any name calling, he called Rawbunzel a whore simply because he didn't like what he perceived to be her opinion that he might talk down to his wife.
posted on December 18, 2001 07:33:26 AM new
By the way, how come Uaru feels Rawbunzel alone lacks the information or experience to evaluate his domestic situation?
That has me puzzled. He obviously seems to feel that any stranger that happens to pop into Barry's place would have that "information or experience" or why else would he start a thread there inviting anyone who cares to post to give opinions of his domestic situation.
Of course, that was different. Posters were sympathizing with him when he was criticising of his wife. That's O.K. I guess to criticize one's wife publicly behind her back.
Irene
[ edited by stockticker on Dec 18, 2001 08:21 AM ]
posted on December 18, 2001 08:33:07 AM newCharlotte, the point is, as Bunni observed, you are oblivious to name-calling one one side. There is no response or retaliation. This is part of an ongoing dispute, and both sides are to blame. If you are offended by name-calling, you have a funny way of showing it.
Steve, that is a bunch of crap...
uaru alone is responsible for what he said...no one else in this thread came close to calling anyone else a road whore or a whore of any type. {lain and simple...it was uncalled for, it was abusive and then he defended that he called Rabunzel a road whore and then he blamed everyone else for him having done so, typical abuser behavior. And I am offended...frankly I don't care if you approve of the way I show it...at least I did not call him a whore...
You coming over offering excuses could be showing approval for this type of behavior, or it could be merely a wolf pack response of who the people are and which side of the issue your fellow wolves are on. My response is simply to the behavior...I could give a rat's ass who is who. Calling someone a whore simply because they said something you did not agree with is not something I agree with...no matter who does it. It might matter
to some folks...not at all to others. But I will state my opinion. I am not sure it matters to uaru...but he might consider it all next time...but I know you won;t because it is not what is done that matters to you, merely who is doing it that makes it right or wrong.
Another thought on wolf packs...if one posts a story and others agree with the actions...are those others beholden to defend that person if he later comes under fire for the same actions? Is that a wolfpack?
I did not read the thread at BB until after this all came down. Even when I did...I have no opinion of uaru's resonse to his wife's shortcomings...it is between them and I am not there. They live together and have what works for them. I am sure that, if I told tales of Ted and I, there would be those of you that would not approve of all I do to the poor sainted man...but hell, he has been with me for 31 years...I can't be all #*!@. I still think calling a woman a road whore over a chat board post is wrong...
Please call me Charlotte so I don't have ta change my ID.
posted on December 18, 2001 04:07:35 PM new
I missed a pack meeting. I wish to hell that we could get the kinks worked out in that email list. Lol
I've always thought that uaru was pretty condescending toward women but I see now how much the past moderation restrained him. And Steve's such a white knight here at the Round Table. Uaru must feel secure knowing that he has his protection.
posted on December 18, 2001 07:48:12 PM new
Charlotte, I do agree with many of Uaru's posts. In this case, I think his response to Rawbunzel was extreme and uncalled for. And also, not at all unusual on these boards. In fact, I recall your advising me long ago to grow a thick skin.
If you read my responses, you see that my objection is to the sexist attitudes displayed by many of the women in this thread. Nothing more. I am not defending anyone. As to who said what, it is ironic that KRS can threaten violence, call another poster a "pussy," and it passes without comment. There is certainly bias here. Hypocricy. And the inevitable "gender card." If I had made KRS' comment to Helen, the whole board would be on fire. That is why you are hypocrites.
[ edited by twinsoft on Dec 18, 2001 07:54 PM ]
This topic is 6 pages long: 1new2new3new4new5new6new
These things always just happen when they happen. 
Whether they all are or not, he certainly was being that way.