[OT] OT Discussion fodder
Commander Raynor RayCav
Matt Huang
>From: Commander Raynor RayCav gera...@yahoo.com
>Date: 9/27/03 10:23 PM Eastern Daylight Time
>Message-id: <oghcnv08jpg7fcnog...@4ax.com>
I'm almost afraid to read the link just because you were the one to post it
-Just waiting for that class III license-
Shadow...@aol.com
Commander Raynor RayCav
Huang) wrote:
Here are the contents of the article in case you think I somehow
changed the URL of goatse.cx :p
"The Marriage Trap
A new book wrestles with monogamy and its modern discontents.
By Meghan O'Rourke
Posted Wednesday, September 3, 2003, at 5:01 PM PT
The classic 1960s feminist critique of marriage was that it suffocated
women by tying them to the home and stifling their identity. The hope
was that in a non-sexist society marriage could be a harmonious,
genuine connection of minds. But 40 years after Betty Friedan, Laura
Kipnis has arrived with a new jeremiad, Against Love: A Polemic, to
tell us that this hope was forlorn: Marriage, she suggests, belongs on
the junk heap of human folly. It is an equal-opportunity oppressor,
trapping men and women in a life of drudgery, emotional anesthesia,
and a tug-of-war struggle to balance vastly different needs.
The numbers seem to back up her thesis: Modern marriage doesn't work
for the majority of people. The rate of divorce has roughly doubled
since the 1960s. Half of all marriages end in divorce. And as sketchy
as poll data can be, a recent Rutgers University poll found that only
38 percent of married couples describe themselves as happy.
What's curious, though, is that even though marriage doesn't seem to
make Americans very happy, they keep getting married (and remarried).
Kipnis' essential question is: Why? Why, in what seems like an age of
great social freedom, would anyone willingly consent to a life of
constricting monogamy? Why has marriage (which she defines broadly as
any long-term monogamous relationship) remained a polestar even as
ingrained ideas about race, gender, and sexuality have been
overturned?
Continue Article
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kipnis' answer is that marriage is an insidious social construct,
harnessed by capitalism to get us to have kids and work harder to
support them. Her quasi-Marxist argument sees desire as inevitably
subordinated to economics. And the price of this subordination is
immense: Domestic cohabitation is a "gulag"; marriage is the rough
equivalent of a credit card with zero percent APR that, upon first
misstep, zooms to a punishing 30 percent and compounds daily. You feel
you owe something, or you're afraid of being alone, and so you "work"
at your relationship, like a prisoner in Siberia ice-picking away at
the erotic permafrost.
Kipnis' ideological tack might easily have been as heavy as Frederick
Engels' in The Origins of the Family, Private Property, and the State,
but she possesses the gleeful, viperish wit of a Dorothy Parker and
the energetic charisma of a cheerleader. She is dead-on about the
everyday exhaustion a relationship can produce. And she's diagnosed
something interesting about the public discourse of marriage. People
are more than happy to talk about how unhappy their individual
marriages are, but public discussion assumes that in each case there
is something wrong with the marriage—not marriage itself.
Take the way infidelity became a prime-time political issue in the
'90s: Even as we wondered whether a politician who was not faithful to
his or her spouse could be "faithful" to the country, no one was
interested in asking whether marital fidelity was realistic or
desirable.
Kipnis' answer to that question is a resounding no. The connection
between sex and love, she argues, doesn't last as long as the need for
each. And we probably shouldn't invest so much of our own happiness in
the idea that someone else can help us sustain it—or spend so much
time trying to make unhappy relationships "work." We should just look
out for ourselves, perhaps mutually—more like two people gazing in the
same general direction than two people expecting they want to look in
each other's eyes for the rest of their (now much longer) lives. For
this model to work, she argues, our social decisions need to start
reflecting the reality of declining marriage rates—not the fairy-tale
"happily ever after all" version.
Kipnis' vision of a good relationship may sound pretty vague. In fact,
she doesn't really offer an alternative so much as diagnose the
problems, hammering us into submission: Do we need a new way of
thinking about love and domesticity? Marriage could be a form of
renewable contract, as she idly wonders (and as Goethe proposed almost
200 years ago in Elective Affinities, his biting portrait of a
marriage blighted by monogamy). Might it be possible to envision
committed nonmonogamous heterosexual relationships?
Kipnis' book derives its frisson from the fact that she's asking
questions no one seems that interested in entertaining. As she notes,
even in a post-feminist age of loose social mores we are still
encouraged, from the time we are children, to think of marriage as the
proper goal of a well-lived life. I was first taught to play at the
marriage fantasy in a Manhattan commune that had been formed
explicitly to reject traditional notions of marriage; faced with a
gaggle of 8-year-old girls, one of the women gave us a white wedding
gown and invited us to imagine the heartthrob whom we wanted to devote
ourselves to. Even radicals have a hard time banishing the dream of an
enduring true love.
Let's accept that the resolute public emphasis on fixing ourselves,
not marriage, can seem grim, and even sentimentally blinkered in its
emphasis on ending divorce. Yet Kipnis' framing of the problem is
grim, too. While she usefully challenges our assumptions about
commitment, it's not evident that we'd be better off in the lust-happy
world she envisions, or that men and women really want the exact same
sexual freedoms. In its ideal form, marriage seems to reify all that's
best about human exchange. Most people don't want to be alone at home
with a cat, and everyone but Kipnis worries about the effects of
divorce on children. "Work," in her lexicon, is always the drudgery of
self-denial, not the challenge of extending yourself beyond what you
knew you could do. But we usually mean two things when we say "work":
The slog we endure purely to put food on the table, and the kind we do
because we like it—are drawn to it, even.
While it's certainly true that people stay in an unhappy relationship
longer than they should, it's not yet clear that monogamy is more
"unnatural" than sleeping around but finding that the hum of your
refrigerator is your most constant companion. And Kipnis spends scant
time thinking about the fact that marriage is a hardy social
institution several thousand years old, spanning many cultures—which
calls into question, to say the least, whether its presence in our
lives today has mostly to do with the insidious chokehold capitalism
has on us.
While Kipnis' exaggerated polemic romp is wittily invigorating, it may
not actually be as radical as it promises to be: These days, even
sitcoms reflect her way of thinking. There's an old episode of
Seinfeld in which Jerry and Kramer anticipate most of Kipnis' critique
of domesticity; Kramer asks Jerry if he and his girlfriend are
thinking about marriage and family, and then cuts him off: "They're
prisons! Man-made prisons! You're doin' time! You get up in the
morning—she's there. You go to sleep at night—she's there. It's like
you gotta ask permission to, to use the bathroom: Is it all right if I
use the bathroom now?" Still, love might indeed get a better name if
we were as attentive to the intellectual dishonesties of the public
debate over its failings as we are to the emotional dishonesties of
adulterers. "
I mean, can't you see the "slate.com" for frickin crying out loud?!?!
What, it's ok only if Strowbridge posts it?!?!
Graeme Dice
>
> On 28 Sep 2003 20:27:23 GMT, shadow...@aol.comkillspam (Matt
> Huang) wrote:
<snip>
> I mean, can't you see the "slate.com" for frickin crying out loud?!?!
> What, it's ok only if Strowbridge posts it?!?!
Any article that suggests that something is a result of "an insidious
social construct,
harnessed by capitalism", is pretty safe to ignore.
Graeme Dice
--
"A polar bear is a rectangular bear after a coordinate
transform."
Commander Raynor RayCav
wrote:
>Commander Raynor RayCav wrote:
>>
>> On 28 Sep 2003 20:27:23 GMT, shadow...@aol.comkillspam (Matt
>> Huang) wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>> I mean, can't you see the "slate.com" for frickin crying out loud?!?!
>> What, it's ok only if Strowbridge posts it?!?!
>
>Any article that suggests that something is a result of "an insidious
>social construct,
>harnessed by capitalism", is pretty safe to ignore.
>
>Graeme Dice
Most of her arguments seem to be the same stuff Marx said, which Wong
shot down a long time ago. Was just kinda thinking it might be
interesting to post here.
Graeme Dice
>
> On Mon, 29 Sep 2003 02:12:42 GMT, Graeme Dice <grd...@sasktel.net>
> wrote:
>
> >Commander Raynor RayCav wrote:
> >>
> >> On 28 Sep 2003 20:27:23 GMT, shadow...@aol.comkillspam (Matt
> >> Huang) wrote:
> >
> ><snip>
> >
> >> I mean, can't you see the "slate.com" for frickin crying out loud?!?!
> >> What, it's ok only if Strowbridge posts it?!?!
> >
> >Any article that suggests that something is a result of "an insidious
> >social construct,
> >harnessed by capitalism", is pretty safe to ignore.
> >
> >Graeme Dice
>
> Most of her arguments seem to be the same stuff Marx said, which Wong
> shot down a long time ago. Was just kinda thinking it might be
> interesting to post here.
Excuse me, but what does Wong's opinion have to do with anything? Valid
criticisms of Marxist ideologies have been around for a hell of a lot
longer than Mike's been alive.
Graeme Dice
--
"There is a time to think, and a time to act. And gentlemen, this
is no time to think."
-- "Canadian Bacon"
Dalton
> Commander Raynor RayCav wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 29 Sep 2003 02:12:42 GMT, Graeme Dice <grd...@sasktel.net>
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Commander Raynor RayCav wrote:
>>>
>>>>On 28 Sep 2003 20:27:23 GMT, shadow...@aol.comkillspam (Matt
>>>>Huang) wrote:
>>>
>>><snip>
>>>
>>>>I mean, can't you see the "slate.com" for frickin crying out loud?!?!
>>>>What, it's ok only if Strowbridge posts it?!?!
>>>
>>>Any article that suggests that something is a result of "an insidious
>>>social construct,
>>>harnessed by capitalism", is pretty safe to ignore.
>>>
>>>Graeme Dice
>>
>>Most of her arguments seem to be the same stuff Marx said, which Wong
>>shot down a long time ago. Was just kinda thinking it might be
>>interesting to post here.
>
>
> Excuse me, but what does Wong's opinion have to do with anything? Valid
> criticisms of Marxist ideologies have been around for a hell of a lot
> longer than Mike's been alive.
Rayray likes to suck Wong's cock since he can't think for himself.
--
Rob "Uncle Roby" Dalton
http://daltonator.net
"In my culture, I would be well within my rights
to dismember you." - Teal'c - Stargate SG-1
Graeme Dice
>
> Graeme Dice wrote:
>
> > Commander Raynor RayCav wrote:
> >
> >>On Mon, 29 Sep 2003 02:12:42 GMT, Graeme Dice <grd...@sasktel.net>
> >>wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>Commander Raynor RayCav wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>On 28 Sep 2003 20:27:23 GMT, shadow...@aol.comkillspam (Matt
> >>>>Huang) wrote:
> >>>
> >>><snip>
> >>>
> >>>>I mean, can't you see the "slate.com" for frickin crying out loud?!?!
> >>>>What, it's ok only if Strowbridge posts it?!?!
> >>>
> >>>Any article that suggests that something is a result of "an insidious
> >>>social construct,
> >>>harnessed by capitalism", is pretty safe to ignore.
> >>>
> >>>Graeme Dice
> >>
> >>Most of her arguments seem to be the same stuff Marx said, which Wong
> >>shot down a long time ago. Was just kinda thinking it might be
> >>interesting to post here.
> >
> >
> > Excuse me, but what does Wong's opinion have to do with anything? Valid
> > criticisms of Marxist ideologies have been around for a hell of a lot
> > longer than Mike's been alive.
>
> Rayray likes to suck Wong's cock since he can't think for himself.
Ahhh, makes sense now.
Graeme Dice
--
"If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called
research, would it?"
-- Albert Einstein.
Commander Raynor RayCav
wrote:
>Commander Raynor RayCav wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 29 Sep 2003 02:12:42 GMT, Graeme Dice <grd...@sasktel.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Commander Raynor RayCav wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On 28 Sep 2003 20:27:23 GMT, shadow...@aol.comkillspam (Matt
>> >> Huang) wrote:
>> >
>> ><snip>
>> >
>> >> I mean, can't you see the "slate.com" for frickin crying out loud?!?!
>> >> What, it's ok only if Strowbridge posts it?!?!
>> >
>> >Any article that suggests that something is a result of "an insidious
>> >social construct,
>> >harnessed by capitalism", is pretty safe to ignore.
>> >
>> >Graeme Dice
>>
>> Most of her arguments seem to be the same stuff Marx said, which Wong
>> shot down a long time ago. Was just kinda thinking it might be
>> interesting to post here.
>
>Excuse me, but what does Wong's opinion have to do with anything? Valid
>criticisms of Marxist ideologies have been around for a hell of a lot
>longer than Mike's been alive.
>
>Graeme Dice
I'm just making a point. God damnit, do you just have this compulsion
to ATTACK EVERY GODDAMN THING I FUCKING TYPE HERE?!?!?!
Commander Raynor RayCav
wrote:
>Graeme Dice wrote:
>
>> Commander Raynor RayCav wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, 29 Sep 2003 02:12:42 GMT, Graeme Dice <grd...@sasktel.net>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Commander Raynor RayCav wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On 28 Sep 2003 20:27:23 GMT, shadow...@aol.comkillspam (Matt
>>>>>Huang) wrote:
>>>>
>>>><snip>
>>>>
>>>>>I mean, can't you see the "slate.com" for frickin crying out loud?!?!
>>>>>What, it's ok only if Strowbridge posts it?!?!
>>>>
>>>>Any article that suggests that something is a result of "an insidious
>>>>social construct,
>>>>harnessed by capitalism", is pretty safe to ignore.
>>>>
>>>>Graeme Dice
>>>
>>>Most of her arguments seem to be the same stuff Marx said, which Wong
>>>shot down a long time ago. Was just kinda thinking it might be
>>>interesting to post here.
>>
>>
>> Excuse me, but what does Wong's opinion have to do with anything? Valid
>> criticisms of Marxist ideologies have been around for a hell of a lot
>> longer than Mike's been alive.
>
>Rayray likes to suck Wong's cock since he can't think for himself.
Oh for goddamn fucking sake's.....
Commander Raynor RayCav
wrote:
Goddamnit, I know what I'm about to bring on myself and I don't
fucking care....
*PLONK!*
Commander Raynor RayCav
wrote:
>Graeme Dice wrote:
>
>> Commander Raynor RayCav wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, 29 Sep 2003 02:12:42 GMT, Graeme Dice <grd...@sasktel.net>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Commander Raynor RayCav wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On 28 Sep 2003 20:27:23 GMT, shadow...@aol.comkillspam (Matt
>>>>>Huang) wrote:
>>>>
>>>><snip>
>>>>
>>>>>I mean, can't you see the "slate.com" for frickin crying out loud?!?!
>>>>>What, it's ok only if Strowbridge posts it?!?!
>>>>
>>>>Any article that suggests that something is a result of "an insidious
>>>>social construct,
>>>>harnessed by capitalism", is pretty safe to ignore.
>>>>
>>>>Graeme Dice
>>>
>>>Most of her arguments seem to be the same stuff Marx said, which Wong
>>>shot down a long time ago. Was just kinda thinking it might be
>>>interesting to post here.
>>
>>
>> Excuse me, but what does Wong's opinion have to do with anything? Valid
>> criticisms of Marxist ideologies have been around for a hell of a lot
>> longer than Mike's been alive.
>
>Rayray likes to suck Wong's cock since he can't think for himself.
I can say the exact same of you and Graeme as of right now regarding
this thread
Graeme Dice
Cry, Raycav. Cry.
Graeme Dice
--
Moses led the Hebrew slaves to the Red Sea, where they made unleavened
bread which is bread made without any ingredients. Moses went up on
Mount Cyanide to get the ten commandments. He died before he ever
reached Canada.
Graeme Dice
No, you weren't making a point, you were making an appeal to authority.
Dalton
Don't make the comments if you can't handle the feedback, kid.
Dalton
> I can say the exact same of you and Graeme as of right now regarding
> this thread
Ah, a parting volley of farts and raspberries.
Do shut up, there's a good chap.
Commander Raynor RayCav
> Commander Raynor RayCav wrote:
>
> > I can say the exact same of you and Graeme as of right now regarding
> > this thread
>
> Ah, a parting volley of farts and raspberries.
>
> Do shut up, there's a good chap.
There are a few things I'm just fucking sick and tired of:
- you thinking that I'm your personal bitch (a lot, if not most, of
your posts directed towards me are nothing more but commands to shut
up, or a simple "BULLSHIT" statement)
- you and your cocksucker Graeme criticising my opinions just because
they happen to agree with someone, primarily Wong
Anyway, I'm sick and tired of the criticism coming from you and your
butt-buddy Graeme. Yes, I know this is ASVS, but you two take it to an
extreme excessive for even here. And I'm just in a really, really,
really bad mood. And I don't really care about consequences right now.
Now, up until now, I was really thinking about plonking you. But we've
had a good relationship before this and I just can't do it. Therefore,
I would really appreciate if you would simply return the favor - just
drop me in your killfile right now as of this instant. You don't have
to deal with me, I don't have to deal with you.
Got that?
Commander Raynor RayCav
> Commander Raynor RayCav wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 29 Sep 2003 06:27:07 GMT, Graeme Dice <grd...@sasktel.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Dalton wrote:
> >>
> >>>Rayray likes to suck Wong's cock since he can't think for himself.
> >>
> >>Ahhh, makes sense now.
> >>
> >>Graeme Dice
> >
> >
> > Goddamnit, I know what I'm about to bring on myself and I don't
> > fucking care....
> >
> >
> > *PLONK!*
>
> Don't make the comments if you can't handle the feedback, kid.
I fucking posted an article and you attacked it right away. Goddamnit,
you two must just be gunning for me aren't you?
Like I said before, just fucking plonk me. Don't make me do the same
of you.
And as for Graeme...do me a big favor and 1.) Fucking drop dead this
instant bitch 2.) Burn in hell 3.) Spend eternity sucking Satan's cock
(but you'd like that too much)
Matt Huang
> Commander Raynor RayCav wrote:
>
> > I can say the exact same of you and Graeme as of right now regarding
> > this thread
>
> Ah, a parting volley of farts and raspberries.
hey wait, aren't you three on the same side? Oh, this is [ot]. . .
Ryan Spickard
> Graeme Dice wrote:
>
> > Commander Raynor RayCav wrote:
> >
> >>On Mon, 29 Sep 2003 02:12:42 GMT, Graeme Dice <grd...@sasktel.net>
> >>wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>Commander Raynor RayCav wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>On 28 Sep 2003 20:27:23 GMT, shadow...@aol.comkillspam (Matt
> >>>>Huang) wrote:
> >>>
> >>><snip>
> >>>
> >>>>I mean, can't you see the "slate.com" for frickin crying out loud?!?!
> >>>>What, it's ok only if Strowbridge posts it?!?!
> >>>
> >>>Any article that suggests that something is a result of "an insidious
> >>>social construct,
> >>>harnessed by capitalism", is pretty safe to ignore.
> >>>
> >>>Graeme Dice
> >>
> >>Most of her arguments seem to be the same stuff Marx said, which Wong
> >>shot down a long time ago. Was just kinda thinking it might be
> >>interesting to post here.
> >
> >
> > Excuse me, but what does Wong's opinion have to do with anything? Valid
> > criticisms of Marxist ideologies have been around for a hell of a lot
> > longer than Mike's been alive.
>
> Rayray likes to suck Wong's cock since he can't think for himself.
...now there's a pleasant image <gag>
--
Ryan Spickard
www.plutonian.org
Most Useless Poster Ever
Ryan Spickard
news:b733d95f.03093...@posting.google.com...
Woohoo! Flame on! :)
Ryan Spickard
news:7751cbfa.03093...@posting.google.com...
ASVS, where we fight vicicously over anything we happen to stumble
upon...god I love this place...
--
Ryan Spickard
www.plutonian.org
"Oh wise and powerful Yoda, please bless this, my 347th viewing of the Holy
Trilogy, and may you grant me the power of The Force to smote down its
enemies which doubt your awesome power..."
Graeme Dice
>
> Dalton <dalto...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<blb85j$aa1gv$2...@ID-108940.news.uni-berlin.de>...
> > Commander Raynor RayCav wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, 29 Sep 2003 06:27:07 GMT, Graeme Dice <grd...@sasktel.net>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >>Dalton wrote:
> > >>
> > >>>Rayray likes to suck Wong's cock since he can't think for himself.
> > >>
> > >>Ahhh, makes sense now.
> > >>
> > >>Graeme Dice
> > >
> > >
> > > Goddamnit, I know what I'm about to bring on myself and I don't
> > > fucking care....
> > >
> > >
> > > *PLONK!*
> >
> > Don't make the comments if you can't handle the feedback, kid.
>
> I fucking posted an article and you attacked it right away. Goddamnit,
> you two must just be gunning for me aren't you?
No, I attacked _you_ for blindly reporting that Mike Wong had shown
something to be wrong, as though he had somehow made the first, or even
one of the better arguments.
> Like I said before, just fucking plonk me. Don't make me do the same
> of you.
I'm sorry, are you trying to tell me what to do? Please wait while I
stop laughing.
> And as for Graeme...do me a big favor and 1.) Fucking drop dead this
> instant bitch 2.) Burn in hell 3.) Spend eternity sucking Satan's cock
> (but you'd like that too much)
I'm sorry, are you trying to shock me? You'll need to do a lot better
than that.
Graeme Dice
>
> Dalton <dalto...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<blb87b$aa1gv$3...@ID-108940.news.uni-berlin.de>...
> > Commander Raynor RayCav wrote:
> >
> > > I can say the exact same of you and Graeme as of right now regarding
> > > this thread
> >
> > Ah, a parting volley of farts and raspberries.
> >
> > Do shut up, there's a good chap.
>
> There are a few things I'm just fucking sick and tired of:
>
> - you thinking that I'm your personal bitch (a lot, if not most, of
> your posts directed towards me are nothing more but commands to shut
> up, or a simple "BULLSHIT" statement)
Yes, you really are. You haven't demonstrated the ability to think for
yourself, so we call you on that.
> - you and your cocksucker Graeme criticising my opinions just because
> they happen to agree with someone, primarily Wong
No, then don't "just happen to agree". You have replaced the process of
developing your own opinions with simply using his.
> Anyway, I'm sick and tired of the criticism coming from you and your
> butt-buddy Graeme. Yes, I know this is ASVS, but you two take it to an
> extreme excessive for even here. And I'm just in a really, really,
> really bad mood. And I don't really care about consequences right now.
Boo hoo. Go and cry in a corner. If you think this is somehow extreme,
then you are simply demonstrating how little time you've spent here. I
called Elim an idiot to his face several dozen times, all I've done to
you is complained that you need to stop parroting Wong.
And I don't give a flying fuck if you're in a bad mood.
> Now, up until now, I was really thinking about plonking you. But we've
> had a good relationship before this and I just can't do it. Therefore,
> I would really appreciate if you would simply return the favor - just
> drop me in your killfile right now as of this instant. You don't have
> to deal with me, I don't have to deal with you.
I'm sorry, but telling people to killfilter you is a lot like telling
them to go jump off a bridge. In short, it demonstrates that you're an
asshole.
Dalton
> Dalton <dalto...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<blb87b$aa1gv$3...@ID-108940.news.uni-berlin.de>...
>
>>Commander Raynor RayCav wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I can say the exact same of you and Graeme as of right now regarding
>>>this thread
>>
>>Ah, a parting volley of farts and raspberries.
>>
>>Do shut up, there's a good chap.
>
>
> There are a few things I'm just fucking sick and tired of:
>
> - you thinking that I'm your personal bitch (a lot, if not most, of
> your posts directed towards me are nothing more but commands to shut
> up, or a simple "BULLSHIT" statement)
I wouldn't do such things if you didn't post stupid shit without
thinking it through first. People do eventually get tired of your brand
of mindless blabber and psychopathic tendencies.
> - you and your cocksucker Graeme criticising my opinions just because
> they happen to agree with someone, primarily Wong
Probably because you seem to thing Wong is the end-all be-all of all
topics and arguments. I seem to remember your email address once being
mikewo...@hotmail.com.
> Anyway, I'm sick and tired of the criticism coming from you and your
> butt-buddy Graeme. Yes, I know this is ASVS, but you two take it to an
> extreme excessive for even here. And I'm just in a really, really,
> really bad mood. And I don't really care about consequences right now.
What possible consequences could there be?
> Now, up until now, I was really thinking about plonking you. But we've
> had a good relationship before this and I just can't do it. Therefore,
> I would really appreciate if you would simply return the favor - just
> drop me in your killfile right now as of this instant. You don't have
> to deal with me, I don't have to deal with you.
>
> Got that?
Listen, tough-guy wannabe, if you can't take the heat, don't dish out
the fuel. If you post banal crap, or unreliable information, or talk
about how you're going to stalk some girl, expect folks to give you shit
about it. You need to learn how to deal with this type of stuff.
I seriously hope you're seeing a good shrink.
Dalton
>>>Goddamnit, I know what I'm about to bring on myself and I don't
>>>fucking care....
>>>
>>>
>>>*PLONK!*
>>
>>Don't make the comments if you can't handle the feedback, kid.
>
> I fucking posted an article and you attacked it right away.
I did? Where? I remember only two recent attacks on you, and both of
then had to do with the same thing: you tend to let other people do your
thinking for you. I've seen you flip sides on an issue once in no less
than five minutes just because I "convinced" you that my view was right.
> Goddamnit,
> you two must just be gunning for me aren't you?
No, not in particular. ASVS is just slow.
> Like I said before, just fucking plonk me. Don't make me do the same
> of you.
I do have to say that I think that this outburst of yours is a good
sign, because it does show you're not taking it lying down anymore.
You're growing sac; you just told off two senior members of ASVS.
Good show.
Commander Raynor RayCav
wrote:
I know how to respond to this....
*PLONK!*
Dalton
> I know how to respond to this....
>
> *PLONK!*
Huh, too bad Freeagent doesn't have a working kill filter.
Commander Raynor RayCav
> Commander Raynor RayCav wrote:
>
> > I know how to respond to this....
> >
> > *PLONK!*
>
> Huh, too bad Freeagent doesn't have a working kill filter.
Who said I was using *FREE* Agent?
BTW, I'm doing this through Google. As of this moment you're officially dead to me.
Dalton
I'm hurt. Really, I am. No, that's just gas.
Ryan Spickard
> Dalton <dalto...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:<bldsod$aoabo$1...@ID-108940.news.uni-berlin.de>...
> > Commander Raynor RayCav wrote:
> >
> > > I know how to respond to this....
> > >
> > > *PLONK!*
> >
> > Huh, too bad Freeagent doesn't have a working kill filter.
>
> Who said I was using *FREE* Agent?
That sounds like a line from a bad 70's spy film...
> BTW, I'm doing this through Google. As of this moment you're officially
dead to me.
...ummm, can't we all just get along?
--
Ryan Spickard
www.plutonian.org
"Red sun rising in the sky
Sleeping village, cockerels cry
Soft breeze blowing in the trees
peace of mind, feel at ease"
-- Black Sabbath: Sleeping Village
Ryan Spickard
> Commander Raynor RayCav wrote:
>
> > When they stop bitching at me every time I mention "Micheal Wong",
> > then we can talk.
>
> Says the kid with the email address of mikewo...@hotmail.com
I enjoyed that one :)
Ryan Spickard
[snip]
> >...ummm, can't we all just get along?
>
> then we can talk.
I think you all need to lighten up and get back to flaming each other--it
amuses me...
--
Ryan Spickard
www.plutonian.org
"Misty morning, clouds in the sky
Without warning , the wizard walks by
Casting his shadow, weaving his spell
Funny clothes, tinkling bell"
-- Black Sabbath: The Wizard
Commander Raynor RayCav
> "Dalton" <dalto...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:blg2v5$bdv6m$1...@ID-108940.news.uni-berlin.de...
> > Commander Raynor RayCav wrote:
> >
> > > When they stop bitching at me every time I mention "Micheal Wong",
> > > then we can talk.
> >
> > Says the kid with the email address of mikewo...@hotmail.com
>
> I enjoyed that one :)
Don't make me hurt you :p
And as for Dalton - yeah, that's my e-mail. Gotta problem with it?
Apparently you do. So, tough shit.
Dalton
> "Ryan Spickard" <ryan*/*spam*/*@plutonian.org> wrote in message news:<blgd5...@enews3.newsguy.com>...
>
>>"Dalton" <dalto...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:blg2v5$bdv6m$1...@ID-108940.news.uni-berlin.de...
>>
>>>Commander Raynor RayCav wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>When they stop bitching at me every time I mention "Micheal Wong",
>>>>then we can talk.
>>>
>>>Says the kid with the email address of mikewo...@hotmail.com
>>
>>I enjoyed that one :)
>
>
> Don't make me hurt you :p
Now THAT'S comedy. What will you do, sissy-slap him into submission?
> And as for Dalton - yeah, that's my e-mail. Gotta problem with it?
> Apparently you do. So, tough shit.
Bleat for me, sheep.
Commander Raynor RayCav
de-plonked as of this moment.
Ryan Spickard
news:b733d95f.03100...@posting.google.com...
news:<blgd5...@enews3.newsguy.com>...
> > "Dalton" <dalto...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:blg2v5$bdv6m$1...@ID-108940.news.uni-berlin.de...
> > > Commander Raynor RayCav wrote:
> > >
> > > > When they stop bitching at me every time I mention "Micheal Wong",
> > > > then we can talk.
> > >
> > > Says the kid with the email address of mikewo...@hotmail.com
> >
> > I enjoyed that one :)
>
> Don't make me hurt you :p
Are you making a pass at me again?
[snip]
Ryan Spickard
> Commander Raynor RayCav wrote:
>
> > "Ryan Spickard" <ryan*/*spam*/*@plutonian.org> wrote in message
news:<blgd5...@enews3.newsguy.com>...
> >
> >>"Dalton" <dalto...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >>news:blg2v5$bdv6m$1...@ID-108940.news.uni-berlin.de...
> >>
> >>>Commander Raynor RayCav wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>When they stop bitching at me every time I mention "Micheal Wong",
> >>>>then we can talk.
> >>>
> >>>Says the kid with the email address of mikewo...@hotmail.com
> >>
> >>I enjoyed that one :)
> >
> >
> > Don't make me hurt you :p
>
> Now THAT'S comedy. What will you do, sissy-slap him into submission?
That's the typical fantasy, yes...</bad joke>
[snip]
--
Ryan Spickard
www.plutonian.org
"ON the hill the church in ruin
Is the scene of evil doings
It's a place for all bad sinners
Watch them eating dead rats' innards"
-- Black Sabbath: Walpurgis
Commander Raynor RayCav
<ryan*/*spam*/*@plutonian.org> wrote:
>"Dalton" <dalto...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:blhsd4$c46bc$1...@ID-108940.news.uni-berlin.de...
>> Commander Raynor RayCav wrote:
>>
>> > "Ryan Spickard" <ryan*/*spam*/*@plutonian.org> wrote in message
>news:<blgd5...@enews3.newsguy.com>...
>> >
>> >>"Dalton" <dalto...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> >>news:blg2v5$bdv6m$1...@ID-108940.news.uni-berlin.de...
>> >>
>> >>>Commander Raynor RayCav wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>>When they stop bitching at me every time I mention "Micheal Wong",
>> >>>>then we can talk.
>> >>>
>> >>>Says the kid with the email address of mikewo...@hotmail.com
>> >>
>> >>I enjoyed that one :)
>> >
>> >
>> > Don't make me hurt you :p
>>
>> Now THAT'S comedy. What will you do, sissy-slap him into submission?
You should've known all along that's entirely the case :p