purple is good every now and then. it's a special occasion kind of kool-aid. red is the stand-by. also, kool-aid is not described by its flavor but its color.
And after I took the pictures, I put my hat on a bed, stepped on a crack, opened my umbrella inside and crossed a black cats path. I tempt fate, that's what I do.
Kool-aid is the shiznit. No doubt about it. I remember kids, at least around these parts, used to eat the powder instead of actually making it and drinking it.... boy did it bring a sour face to you after eating that stuff.
I have beef with my girlfriend's ex-best-friend for a few reasons: 1) She's a slag. When I say a slag, I mean she has never worn a condom shagging a bloke in her life. 2) She's shagged three of my mates and probably given them all the clap. 3) She sent my girlfriend a long-winded Facebook message saying (among other things) she thinks the whole world revolves around her. Anybody else would tell you she was talking about herself. 4) When I innocently changed my Facebook status to something about friendship, she took that as a snipe at her and sent my girlfriend another message telling her to tell me to f*ck off, and that she doesn't like to air her dirty linen in public like I do (she's worse than me for it considering I did nothing!) 5) She was basically the reason my girlfriend's ex turned up at my birthday extravaganza - she protests her innocence but when she got a lift off her ex, who she knew was going out with my girlfriend's ex that evening as well, it was bound to happen. 6) When me and my girlfriend missed a mutual friend's birthday because we didn't want the awkwardness of seeing her there, and I spoke to her and apologised, her FB status later changed to: XXX can c through u, trying to worm ur way back in. god your so fake!!!! Ha! and later to: XXX can c right through u. god ur so fake!!!! Why did i always choose to ignore that? Ha! 7) She's one of those girls who thinks she's sooooo hot, but she's really not. She just needs a good slap. 8) She looks like Skeletor. Not this Skeletor, mind: /rant
Oh I'll add to that... The 'friend' who I invited on holiday with me and my mates pissed the living day-lights out of me, until I told him that he's a complete kok, and he's dead to me... The girlfriend that I dumped because I had no feelings for her... The 2 of them are now going out
Hahahahahahahahahahahaha thats a double bonus sanchy, 2 less seasons greetings cards for u to send now!
Erm, facebook is an inherant attention seeking tool - if you post on sum1s wall or change your status u guilty of that - how is your new book
I just want to vent my anger and frustration - I want to fume, kick and punch and scream. The reason - It's taken me 3 days to write this bloody 3000 word essay of mine, and hours tonight to draw, scan in and annotate and insert the needed sketches, which were a pain to insert in the correct place. Now I still need to correctly reference the bloody thing, and write an additional 500 word piece. In the meantime, I've had to complete an extensive AUTOCAD drawing, which took 4 hours per day, since Monday, after just a few lessons of the programme. Damnit, the cane shall be flowing from early afternoon tomoro!
Well I have beef with what just happened. And I'm standing up to it. Link to Adidas Thread I defended members of the forum, and then asked for any further argument to be taken to this thread, for the sake of the forum. I then had MORE then insulting comments made to me, and what happens?? I get an infraction from a mod for 'multiple spam', and all the other guy gets is a yellow card? What a complete utter joke. This incident has been dealt with disgustingly. I have been a 'valued' member of the forum for close to 4 years now, and this is what I get?? I want answers
I totally agree with you, the matter was not dealt with the way it should of been. A yellow card is a joke for what that guy said. BUT, it's a little ironic that you're title is "I ain't no drama queen". You blew the whole thing out of proportion. What you said initially started this whole thing, and it was unnecessary to say the least. "Valued member" or not, that doesn't excuse you for starting all of this. You two were both wrong. Get over it, it's done.
That is a little ironic, and I do see the funny side in that, however that title was an appropriate caption to one of my avatars that I had about 2 years ago. I am "over it", however, I am not going to leave it. If I argued the point in the first place, it was because I believed in it. I'm not going to let it be swept under the carpet. I want to discuss the point, or at least be answered. And no, this is not a personal beef with JC, but perhaps this proves my point a little... I sure hope an infraction was handed out here...
tbm - well there are only so many WAGs to go round Pro's can't spend all their lives on the phone to mediocre failed dancers..... Sigh. It's bad I've dragged myself into this, especially as I had to read like 10 pages of the adidas thread to get the background on all this. Now people on here may know that I have an affinity to a few members on here, so I'm going to try and play Devil's Advocate and remain impartial... Ahh, here it goes! So to me there are 4 main issues from R&W's posts: firstly R&W Vs finosis, then R&W Vs supercars, now R&W versus BS policy. The secret 4th would be R&W Vs posting faux pas (e.g. bad SPAG, typos etc etc) - which is a running theme through all his posts. R&W Vs finosis: This one was kind of an innocent misunderstanding so far as I can tell, Sanchy made sound and valid points however was notably testy and emotively argumentative in my opinion. R&W has a huge chip on his shoulder about the way the major companies are mistreating the consumer (a widely held opinion around here) and seemingly vented at finosis's quasi-attempt to defend the companies. Both individuals made it un-necessarily personal, finosis making assertions without foundation whilst Sanch really got on his high-horse about SPAG. R&W Vs supercars This is the beef that really got individuals into trouble, but if I were to make assumptions I'd say that Sanchy was still in fight mode after the very fresh beef with fin, wounds were raw and the underlying crusade against bad SPAG reared its head again. supercars had put noses out of joint with his own un-necessarily abrupt put down to DoubleR23. 7killer7 threw his 2cents in, cheekily making a point about throwing stones in glass houses. supercars then compounded the issue by posting another retort with poor miss-spellings and "text speak", and seemingly missed the point as shrapnac clarified. Although I claim I believe R&W was more than game for a battle, to his credit he kept his silence on this until supercars came out of nowhere and blasted people for lying about release dates, and then made what I agree seems a sarcastic (although awkwardly worded) reference to getting paid for providing links to unreleased boots on ebay. (deliberate naughtiness here) R&W blasts supercars, utilising the very same CAPS as emphasis method he'd previously criticised finosis for. To be honest, I have to say I think R&Ws response exacerbates the whole situation here, and is disproportionately aggressive. The attempt to defend the forum members was honourable but slightly misguided in its execution, so far as I can see, and was made personal by R&W in the first instance (with the condescending statements about maturity and getting a job). However, supercars then does himself no favours with his profane and incoherent response. I'd argue that the statement that offended isn't necessarily racist (see my defence of Big Ron for my reasoning in more depth) as one must extrapolate and infer that supercars' statement is racist (it's an intuitive jump, but a jump nonetheless). However, lines were crossed and I agree action against supercars should have taken place at this point. Sanch gloated in victory at this point having drawn his rival into a fatal move. finosis resumes his issue with a jibe, based on his own lingering feelings, and R&W eloquently defends his position with a valid response showing that whoever started the beef, supercars lost it for himself. R&W Vs BS Policy "BS policy" may well be an ironic title here, but to be pernickety, "by the book" R&W was guilty as he did make several posts irrelevant to the thread, and whilst I'd never want to censor someone's right to debate, the forum rules do dictate that an infraction was appropriate - I assume finosis also received an infraction, as would be appropriate, whilst soorbob, ctoa23, I<3F50, GaaFootballer and IntheUpper90s also made off topic posts, but assume they got away with warnings at most for singular offences. supercars should also have received an infraction, and I can see how he could have been yellow carded for the "born in a bin" comment (though I'd not want to have to defend a potential rebuttal if I'd admonished him as a "racist" for his words). R&W demands answers, and depending on policy (I have no idea if information of other individuals discipline if freely available, even to "concerned individuals" in such incidents), is clearly entitled to it. But so long as finosis and supercars both did indeed receive infraction & infraction and yellow respectively, I don't see much room for agrievement from Sanch. Rdub then goes onto quote a post from a current moderator that clearly shows JC make a personal and patronising attack in a beef from 6 years ago. I have no idea if JC was a mod then, but to me this is moot (as a voluntary job I can't imagine BS has the option of recruiting anyone with a 100% unblemished track-record in terms of non-inflammatory posts), and whilst the post is unquestionably argumentative it is a single OT post in that thread, and JC ignores the bait in his final post in the thread (I'd personally have to retort in such and feel perhaps JC could have addressed it, but there's no need for him to justify himself this long after rising above personal criticism for the good of the particular thread). The point is, so far as I understand it R&W got his wrists slapped as a diplomatic move as he had indeed made multiple OT posts in a single thread, which was not the case for JC in the Diadora thread - I see how that must be extremely aggravating but as a matter of protocol is somewhat understandable (again, this is based upon the assumption that others were also dealt with in an equitable fashion for their own violations). R&W Vs Posts with bad Spelling, Punctuation and Grammar Now for me this is perhaps the most compelling of the Beefs, most notably because as someone with both an education AND a predilection for vernacular and colloquial adaptations of language in modally specific situations (I'm lazy and use txt speak and spoken language for effect innit!), I do wonder if it's an inequitable bias from R&W to myself that he's never picked me up on it. I do readily mock my friends for spelling mistakes, and am somewhat of a linguistic fascist when it comes to incorrectly used terminology, however with the benefit of education and privilege I am aware of the hegemonistic power gained from "correct" language, and the snobbery associated with it. It is unfair of us to dismiss out of hand any opinions that are not articulated to the manner we are accustomed, nor does bad SPAG negate the validity of an argument or undermine the point being made. It is arguable that the disdain for contemporary "text speak" as it is not an linguae francae can be seen as a prejudice similar to any discrimination based on regional dialects, and one could well make the case that the semantics of the post are irrelevant because of the terminology employed (sort of what Sanch does when makes this comment to finosis "Well you didn't take any of my punctuation advice, so I'm not actually going to read your post properly") is as deplorable an act as the controversial comment from supercars. Irrespective of intent, it doesn't matter if the individual is deliberately assuming a linguistic technique of incapable of any other, I think it is important to realise that this forum is part of a multicultural modern online community that is inclusive to all levels of development - would it make a difference to find out that a poster had learning or mental disabilities? Not to mention that English is far from the only language spoken by members here. Now I'm not one for tolerence, as I know Sanch isn't, but life is too short to stress over ill-advised crusades to up-skill the entire internet in terms of everyones posting etiquette, so I gotta say it's probably best to realise that you're own discomfort with someones language isn't nearly as big an issue as their inability to achieve because of it, no need to belittle people if you believe they are below you as life will take care of that itself! R&W, you're still my boy and I ride for you, and I hope you've taken no offence to what I've written. I do hope that punishment has been delivered fairly to the others involved and it should serve as a warning, even to myself, that we all need to make things less personal and just get on with discussing footy equipment, and that apps has manish hands.....
Hahahaha! No no Case, everything you said there is completely warranted and true. You have in effect just done what I was asking for - an explanation to the punishment handed out. I understand why JC took the route he did in handing out cards etc - similar to that of the school teacher who gives detention to both kids fighting in class, despite who started it or retaliated. However, in such a case, I do expect an explanation from him explaining why he went about it in such a way. Something more then just "Infraction for Multiple Spam". Anyhow, that was that, and you managed to turn it into quite an entertaining commentary. At the end of the day, all is said and done....and I know that I'm right.
I think you got an infraction for 'multiple spam' as 28 points is the most that can be issued on a yellow card after that its a red one! But on the list the only thing that gets you 28 points is multiple spam. So i think thats why! But if you have a problem send JC a PM and see what he has to say. There isn't any point bringing it up on here when JC is the only one who knows why he did what he did. I'm sure he'll reply to a PM to you. Case ... hahaha, you absolute TIT! you make me laugh!! appleCORR
Can someone explain the points = prizes system? I had no idea, thought it was arbitrary - guess it's reassuring to hear theres a method mind! Do I got any points? Is "multiple incoherant ramblings" infractionable?