PLF takes a day off.
Boon
GeoSynch
> Wow, PLF didn't post yesterday. Maybe she committed suicide.
"I, on the other hand, have lovely skin," an emolliated Marc Phillips, with
feminine vanity, gushed to a swooning Jilly and a less-than-impressed Boy
George.
Boon
I'm not sure why you would keep publicizing the fact that you didn't
get that joke.
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
He coin a new phrase because he can't see the forest from the trees.
He proud of it.
Boon
Yesterday I was at a friend's house and his little chihuahua kept
barking at me. Whenever I would face it, it would run away in fear.
Whenever I turned to walk away, it would growl and try to nip at my
heels.
Sound familiar?
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
I give up. Who?
Boon
145,000 sullen IT geeks just like PLF.
GeoSynch
> > "I, on the other hand, have lovely skin," an emolliated Marc Phillips, with
> > feminine vanity, gushed to a swooning Jilly and a less-than-impressed Boy
> > George.
> I'm not sure why you would keep publicizing the fact that you didn't get that
> joke.
A pathological liar like is willing to believe whatever version of reality best
suits his needs at the moment. So let's dismantle this claim that it was merely
a "joke."
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.audio.opinion/msg/2245659029387399
You taunted Lionel with this dig:
"That is the sport of a huge, pimply French twat like yourself."
And all that pathetic frog could muster was a "BLAH, BLAH, BLAH" retort.
You then stated this with sincere earnestness to further torment Lionel:
"Oh, I hit another nerve. I guess you have a skin problem as well, no?
That's too bad. I, on the other hand, have lovely skin. People can't
believe I'm the age I am. I have almost no grey hair, and my face is
free from wrinkle or blemishes."
"I, on the other hand, have lovely skin."
"People can't believe I'm the age I am."
"I have almost no grey hair."
"[M]y face is free from wrinkle or blemishes."
Jokes? Sure they were (if you were spoofing a pansy, maybe).
The only joke here is you, monkeyboy.
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
You hit a nerve, Boon. Sugar must have some awful acne. It appears
that the Senator's skin is pockmarked and dry and leathery and
grotesque. I'll wager he grows facial hair in a vain attempt to cover
up what is likely some pretty repugnant skin covered with angry
suppurating pustules.
In fact, it's all too clear now that Senator Sugar's beard gets
absolutely matted down with pus. "No, honey, that isn't pus. It's
jism, honest!" he tells anybody who will listen. Then he thinks to
himself, "Damn! No matter what I use I cannot emolliate my skin!"
That must be where Senator Sugar's jism fixation comes from. He
fantasizes that there are other males whose faces are dripping thick
yellow ooze and who use the "jism defense" to cover it up. This also
explains why he sits alone in bathroom stalls and taps his feet.
Nobody has to see his wretched face then.
(I frequently get complimented on the softness of my skin. It drives
women into paroxysms of delight when they touch it. They always ask me
what lotions and cleansers I use. "You must use the expensive stuff!
Your skin is flawless!" they always say. They cannot believe it when I
tell them I don't use any. None at all. That always drives them into
paroxysms of jealousy.)
(And now Senator Sugar will be envious of both of us.)
GeoSynch
>> "I, on the other hand, have lovely skin."
>> "People can't believe I'm the age I am."
>> "I have almost no grey hair."
>> "[M]y face is free from wrinkle or blemishes."
> (I frequently get complimented on the softness of my skin. It drives
> women into paroxysms of delight when they touch it. They always ask me
> what lotions and cleansers I use. "You must use the expensive stuff!
> Your skin is flawless!" they always say. They cannot believe it when I
> tell them I don't use any. None at all. That always drives them into
> paroxysms of jealousy.)
Sounds like a couple of hussies about to get into a catfight real soon. ;-)
GeoSynch
And Boy George, incapacitated with another debilititating homo disease, isn't
around to referee this impending melee.
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
Yes, Boon, a nerve has been severely struck.
A double response to this one shows how piercing this is to Senator
Sugar's frail ego. He's probably whimpering and trying to wring his
beard out right now.
Why are some people born with clear, glowing skin, and others reduced
to impatiently tapping their shoes on the floors of random men's
rooms? It just doesn't seem fair.
GeoSynch
>> > Sounds like a couple of hussies about to get into a catfight real soon. ;-)
> > And Boy George, incapacitated with another debilititating homo disease,
> > isn't around to referee this impending melee.
> Yes, Boon, a nerve has been severely struck.
Does Jilly fancy herself prettier than Marcey?
Boon
Again, you missed the joke. Others here got it. Why not you?
In fact, why do most people's jokes fly over your head? Is it because
you suffer from ASD and you are unable to undersatnd social cues from
others? The two behavioral therapists who are reviewing your posts
seem to think so.
Boon
That's a strange interpretation. What you're witnessing is two normal
people joking with each other, and again you can't understand it. The
fact that we're poking fun at your obtuse response is over your head
as well.
Are you aware that you suffer from ASD? Most adults can't get a proper
assessment or diagnosis since most of the assessments are designed for
children.
Boon
> GeoSynch [The Greatest] observed:
What an odd thing to say, that you're the "greatest." That's something
only a child (or an autistic person) would say. Normal people don't do
around calling themselves the greatest unless their self-esteem is
abysmal. Is this a much-needed self-affirmation?
Now you're responding to your own posts. You're basically talking to
yourself. I bet that you talk to yourself quite a bit during the long
lonely nights in your IT closet. Because of your ASD, you probably
have little or no friends in the real world.
Boon
Who are these people, Jilly and Marcey? (By the way, a smart person
would have used a more proper spelling such as Marcy, Marcie or
Marcia). The fact that you continually have to call people by strange
nicknames means two things. First, you're emulating George since you
are in awe of his literary prowess. Unfortunately, George's nicknames
are actually amusing to others, therefore giving him a reason to
continue in the name of entertainment. You, however, receive
absolutely no positive reinforcement for any of your behaviors, which
indicates a true psychological problem. Normal people simply don't
hang out where they're not wanted (or even acknowledged).
Second, you have to assign people nicknames because you really aren't
responding to the actual people who post here. You're responding to
fantasy versions you've created, versions that are so flawed that you
are finally able to say you are superior to them. "Jilly" is in the
brig or performing latrine duty, "BaBoon" is destitute and has failed
at a serious of careers and "Pudge" is on the verge of suicide. The
fact is, you can't best the real people, so you have to engage the
inferior versions you've created and lied about. Unfortunately, those
people don't exist.
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
Go east on him, Boon. If you had skin like his you'd be a mess too.
GeoSynch
> > Does Jilly fancy herself prettier than Marcey?
> Who are these people, Jilly and Marcey? (By the way, a smart person would have
> used a more proper spelling such as Marcy, Marcie or Marcia).
OK, Marcy it is then.
> "Jilly" is in the brig or performing latrine duty,
Indeed she is.
> "BaBoon" is destitute and has failed at a serious [sic] of careers
Seriously failed, I'd say, displaying yet again another thought-process error.
> and "Pudge" is on the verge of suicide.
Since Boy George abruptly stopped posting the day after Christmas, it was not an
unreasonable assumption. And now that The MidYut has abruptly stopped posting
again, could it be due to incapacitation resulting from another debilitating
homo disease?
GeoSynch
>> > Sounds like a couple of hussies about to get into a catfight real soon. ;-)
> > And Boy George, incapacitated with another debilititating homo disease,
> > isn't around to referee this impending melee.
> Now you're responding to your own posts.
Couldn't leave The MidYut out of the tussle.
GeoSynch
> > "I, on the other hand, have lovely skin."
> > "People can't believe I'm the age I am."
> > "I have almost no grey hair."
> > "[M]y face is free from wrinkle or blemishes."
> > Jokes? Sure they were (if you were spoofing a pansy, maybe).
> > The only joke here is you, monkeyboy.
> Again, you missed the joke. Others here got it. Why not you?
You'll just lie to the bitter end, no matter how obvious it is that you are
lying, another reason why you have no credibility.
> In fact, why do most people's jokes fly over your head?
Proving what a pathological liar you are by immediately believing whatever lie
you just recently make up.
> Is it because you suffer from ASD and you are unable to undersatnd social cues
> from others?
Here you're asking (and in the other post proclaiming) making a mockery of it.
> The two behavioral therapists who are reviewing your posts seem to think so.
Since your armchair psychology attempts have been discredited as those of a
failed amateur, you now turn to higher authorities to bolster your feeble
claims. Whether they exist or not and whether you'd report only negative
assessments and overlook any others is automatically called into account because
you have no credibility as a journalistic purveyor.
GeoSynch
> Are you aware that you suffer from ASD?
More armchair psychology from a failed amateur?
GeoSynch
> Go east on him, Boon.
Since I reside on the west coast, the BaBoon probably took that bit of advice
long ago, old girl.
Boon
> Buffoon bumbled:
"Bumbled" is not an appropriate verb here.
>
> > > Does Jilly fancy herself prettier than Marcey?
> > Who are these people, Jilly and Marcey? (By the way, a smart person would have
> > used a more proper spelling such as Marcy, Marcie or Marcia).
>
> OK, Marcy it is then.
Considering that's not my name, I probably won't respond to it.
>
> > "Jilly" is in the brig or performing latrine duty,
>
> Indeed she is.
Prove it. If you can't, then we'll just chalk it up to your abysmal
self-esteem and your need to create fantasy characters so you can feel
superior to them.
>
> > "BaBoon" is destitute and has failed at a serious [sic] of careers
>
> Seriously failed, I'd say, displaying yet again another thought-process error.
Considering I just pointed out one of your typos, the same can be said
about you. Then again, your mental issues prevent you from seeing
your own glaring faults. People who suffer from ASD are quick to point
out errors in others, and think that makes them "inferior." People
with ASD are always saying things like "people are SO stupid." What
they (and you) fail to realize is their inability to have meaningful
interpersonal relationships is a far bigger mental defect than making
a typo.
>
> > and "Pudge" is on the verge of suicide.
>
> Since Boy George abruptly stopped posting the day after Christmas, it was not an
> unreasonable assumption.
Yes, it's a very unreasonable assumption. Many people have left RAO
over the years and not one of them, to my knowledge, has committed
suicide.
The behavioral therapists told me something interesting. When people
like you tell glaring, obvious lies about others, they usually choose
something based upon their own fears. Even you agree with this, saying
that when I tease you for being one step away from eating a bullet, it
says more about me than you. In my particular case you were wrong (as
usual), but equating an absence from a Usenet discussion group with a
possible suicide is not a thought a normal person would have. The
therapists concur.
And now that The MidYut has abruptly stopped posting
> again, could it be due to incapacitation resulting from another debilitating
> homo disease?
Why would you assume this? Have you suffered from "debilitating homo
diseases" in the past? Again, this is not an assumption a normal
person would make. And again, it makes perfect sense because I can't
believe your writing style comes from a heterosexual male.
Boon
> Marcy groused:
There's another incorrect choice of verb.
There is no such thing as a MidYut. It's your defense mechanisms
trying to protect your fragile psyche. It's okay.
Boon
> Buffoon burbled:
"Burble" would only be a correct choice if we were speaking. A written
word cannot be burbled.
>
> > > "I, on the other hand, have lovely skin."
> > > "People can't believe I'm the age I am."
> > > "I have almost no grey hair."
> > > "[M]y face is free from wrinkle or blemishes."
> > > Jokes? Sure they were (if you were spoofing a pansy, maybe).
> > > The only joke here is you, monkeyboy.
> > Again, you missed the joke. Others here got it. Why not you?
>
> You'll just lie to the bitter end, no matter how obvious it is that you are
> lying, another reason why you have no credibility.
That's very similar to Arny. Whenever he heard something he didn't
like, he called it a lie. Everything became a lie. As it turned out,
Arny has a narcissitic personality disorder. NPD causes people to
reject anything that does not fit into their fantasy constructs.
Do you think you have NPD or ASD? It's possible to have both, you
know.
>
> > In fact, why do most people's jokes fly over your head?
>
> Proving what a pathological liar you are by immediately believing whatever lie
> you just recently make up.
Just prove that I lied. That's all you have to do. Break free from
your fantasy construct and actually deliver a meaningful statement
(i.e. one that is based in reality and not your imagination) for once.
I was teasing Lionel. Others knew I was teasing Lionel. Why are you
the only one who doesn't see this? Are your fantasies preventing you
from accepting reality?
>
> > Is it because you suffer from ASD and you are unable to undersatnd social cues
> > from others?
>
> Here you're asking (and in the other post proclaiming) making a mockery of it.
That sentence is not correct. If you remove the parenthetical phrase,
you're saying "asking making a mockery of it." That makes no sense.
Try again.
>
> > The two behavioral therapists who are reviewing your posts seem to think so.
>
> Since your armchair psychology attempts have been discredited as those of a
> failed amateur, you now turn to higher authorities to bolster your feeble
> claims.
That's not true. I pegged Scott as having Aspergers, and to this day
he has not disputed this. I pegged Arny as having NPD, and a
psychiatrist friend of mine said that I had "pegged it." Bratzi won't
admit to being autistic, but his behaviors are so representative of
ASD that he'd probably "peg the meters" if he took an assessment test.
Whether they exist or not and whether you'd report only negative
> assessments and overlook any others is automatically called into account because
> you have no credibility as a journalistic purveyor.
That's not true either. In your eyes I have no credibility, and yet I
still write for a living. Your fantasy construct where I have failed
at several careers isn't even close to the truth. Unlike you, I have
experience in several areas, which makes me extremely valuable in the
job market. I have 20 years of management experience, 8 years of
telecommunications experience and 12 years of writing and editing
experience. I currently own my own business and have eight clients. I
made much more money in 2009 than 2008. There is no failure in my
life.
If you lost your job tomorrow, it would be quite a battle for you to
find another one. Your lack of interpersonal skills disqualifies you
from any sort of leadership role. The job you have now is probably as
good as it gets.
Boon
I noticed you failed to answer the question. Very interesting.
Boon
> Jilly jived:
That makes no sense as a verb choice.
>
> > Go east on him, Boon.
>
> Since I reside on the west coast, the BaBoon probably took that bit of advice
> long ago, old girl.
Shhh! is a demostrably better writer than you are.
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
> On Apr 7, 1:39 pm, "GeoSynch" <SpamSla...@Casablanca.com> wrote:
>
> > Jilly jived:
>
> That makes no sense as a verb choice.
Few of his do.
> > > Go east on him, Boon.
>
> > Since I reside on the west coast, the BaBoon probably took that bit of advice
> > long ago, old girl.
>
> Shhh! is a demostrably better writer than you are.
Yes, it's quite a leap to determine how that could happen, what with
the "T" and the "Y" keys being next to each other and all...
But thank you for the compliment. 2pid is extra pissed now.
Boon
PLF is making some of the exact same dumb mistakes as 2pid. I'm
thinking we may have to call him 2pid2.
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
You know, the Senator actually could be a 2pid sockpuppet. Look at the
evidence: not knowing what words mean, critisizing others for the eact
same things he's guilty of, alienating virtually everybody he comes in
contact with, arguing for the sake of arguing, rampant homophobia,
(proably false) religiosity, confused conservative values, a love of
money above all else, refusal to admit mistakes...
And he's admitted that he lives on the west coast. That settles it.
Senator Sugar is really 2pid. Case closed!
Boon
I forgot about the religious bit. Of course, PLF's obvious obsession
of bearing false witness against his neighbors will land him straight
in hell. He and Arny can then tell lies about each other as their
carcasses are roasting over Satan's BBQ grill.
GeoSynch
>> > Go east on him, Boon.
> > Since I reside on the west coast, the BaBoon probably took that bit of
> > advice long ago, old girl.
> Shhh! is a demostrably better writer than you are.
Jilly makes fewer writing mistakes than you do and when she does they're usually
typos.
Your mistakes, however, tend to be thought-process errors along the lines of
"serious of careers" when it properly should have been "series of careers"
undoubtedly due to misfiring synapses from all that aspartame over the years.
GeoSynch
> [GeoSynch The Greatest] wrote:
> > Marcy groused:
> There's another incorrect choice of verb.
Is it really, Marcy?
> > Couldn't leave The MidYut out of the tussle.
> There is no such thing as a MidYut.
Doug Haugen concocted that moniker for 'lil Georgie (and that one, too.). ;-)
GeoSynch
>> > Are you aware that you suffer from ASD?
> > More armchair psychology from a failed amateur?
> I noticed you failed to answer the question. Very interesting.
I'm not inclined to answer whatever idiotic questions you may pose.
But I do recall reading several years ago that a sign of autism in children was
that they would have hysterical tantrums if they perceived an object in their
environment (like a toy in their room or something) had been disturbed. You fit
that description with your tendency to go apeguano whenever somebody like Scott
or Arny or Bret or me posts anything on rao. You get violently deranged and try
to chase them off rao like some berserk little chimp.
GeoSynch
> "Burble" would only be a correct choice if we were speaking. A written word
> cannot be burbled.
The MidYut had a propensity for using that word in that same context. Did you
ever try to correct 'lil Georgie for doing so? Why not, reeking hypocrite?
> Do you think you have NPD or ASD?
No, but I'm beginning to think you do.
> It's possible to have both, you know.
Is it really?
>> > In fact, why do most people's jokes fly over your head?
> > Proving what a pathological liar you are by immediately believing whatever
> > lie you just recently make up.
>Just prove that I lied. That's all you have to do...for once.
Does the braggadocio claim of 150,000 readers that you couldn't substantiate
when called to account ring a bell?
> I was teasing Lionel. Others knew I was teasing Lionel. Why are you the only
> one who doesn't see this? Are your fantasies preventing you from accepting
> reality?
No matter how vigorously your nose gets rubbed in it, you still fantastically
think you come up smelling like a rose.
>> > Is it because you suffer from ASD and you are unable to undersatnd social
>> > cues from others?
> Here you're asking (and in the other post proclaiming) making a mockery of it.
> That sentence is not correct. If you remove the parenthetical phrase, you're
> saying "asking making a mockery of it." That makes no sense. Try again.
Alright. Here you asking (whether I have ASD) and in another post you are
proclaiming (that I have ASD), thereby making a mockery out of both claims.
>> > The two behavioral therapists who are reviewing your posts seem to think
>> > so.
> Since your armchair psychology attempts have been discredited as those of a
> failed amateur, you now turn to higher authorities to bolster your feeble
> claims.
> That's not true. I pegged Scott as having Aspergers, and to this day he has
> not disputed this. I pegged Arny as having NPD, and a psychiatrist friend of
> mine said that I had "pegged it." Bratzi won't admit to being autistic, but
> his behaviors are so representative of ASD that he'd probably "peg the meters"
> if he took an assessment test.
If they do, in fact, exist and are, in fact, qualified, I wonder what they would
make of your compulsion to flamefest on rao be it with Arny or Bobo or Scott or
Bret or me or whoever, nobody else engages in the incendiary, scorched-earth
guerrilla warfare with the same gusto as you have for it.
> > Whether they exist or not and whether you'd report only negative assessments
> > and overlook any others is automatically called into account because you
> > have no credibility as a journalistic purveyor.
> That's not true either. In your eyes I have no credibility, and yet I still
> write for a living. Your fantasy construct where I have failed at several
> careers isn't even close to the truth. Unlike you, I have experience in
> several areas, which makes me extremely valuable in the job market. I have 20
> years of management experience, 8 years of telecommunications experience and
> 12 years of writing and editing experience. I currently own my own business
> and have eight clients. I made much more money in 2009 than 2008. There is no
> failure in my life.
Then why were you moaning to Scott you couldn't afford healthcare for your
"special needs" offspring?
> If you lost your job tomorrow, it would be quite a battle for you to find
> another one. Your lack of interpersonal skills disqualifies you from any sort
> of leadership role. The job you have now is probably as good as it gets.
Yes, indeed, it is, which is why I've been at the same place for so long. I've
been offered leadership positions on more than one occasion but I've declined
because I like what I do. It's mentally challenging, but relatively easy for me,
as it provides an ideal venue for my creative problem-solving abilities working
with large databases and conceptualizing and implementing robust,
near-bulletproof programming solutions. It's a natural high in and of itself.
GeoSynch
> "Bumbled" is not an appropriate verb here.
The BaBoon endeavored into another quixotic misadventure critiquing my posting
prefaces.
> > OK, Marcy it is then.
> Considering that's not my name, I probably won't respond to it.
But you just did. LoL!
>> > "BaBoon" is destitute and has failed at a serious [sic] of careers
> > Seriously failed, I'd say, displaying yet again another thought-process
> > error.
> Considering I just pointed out one of your typos, the same can be said about
> you.
There's a difference between typos and the thought-process errors you commit all
too frequently.
>> > and "Pudge" is on the verge of suicide.
> Since Boy George abruptly stopped posting the day after Christmas, it was not
> an unreasonable assumption.
> Yes, it's a very unreasonable assumption.
No, it isn't, not in Pudge's case, anyway.
> Many people have left RAO over the years and not one of them, to my knowledge,
> has committed suicide.
But none of them posted practically obsessively each and every day for 15 or so
years as did Pudge.
> The behavioral therapists told me something interesting.
Something far more interesting today on Natural News via the UK Telegraph site:
"Proposed updates to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders
(DSM) are prompting many to question whether or not the psychiatric profession
itself has gone crazy."
http://www.naturalnews.com/028529_psychiatry_mental_illness.html
The psychiatry profession has devolved from whatever therapeutic legitimacy it
once had to being little more than street-corner drug peddlers for Big Pharma.
What's your "behavioral therapists" reaction to that?
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
> Then why were you moaning to Scott you couldn't afford healthcare for your
> "special needs" offspring?
I recall that conversation. The exact quote Boon said was "I [Boon]
wish that healthcare was more affordable".
2pid was the one to twist that into "I [Boon] wish I could afford
healthcare". I'd imagine you can see the difference between the two
statements. 2pid couldn't but 2pid also has well-documented issues
with comprehending simple English.
> It's mentally challenging, but relatively easy for me,
As we've learned from you, you've stopped learning and you are proud
of that. I therefore am not surprised that you find things that are
easy for you "challenging".
Or are you coin (LOL!) a new meaning for the word "challenging"?
GeoSynch
> As we've learned from you, you've stopped learning
To no longer read books, be they fiction or non-fiction, is to stop learning?
What are you - stupid or something? LoL!
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
> Jilly giggled:
>
> > As we've learned from you, you've stopped learning
>
> To no longer read books, be they fiction or non-fiction, is to stop learning?
For most people, yes. Others can learn that mashed potatoes are
squishy by feeling them go through their fingers.
> What are you - stupid or something? LoL!
While still others have much to learn from Sesame Street reruns.
Let me guess, Senator Sugar: Cookie Monster is your favorite.
Boon
> Buffoon burbled:
>
> >> > Go east on him, Boon.
> > > Since I reside on the west coast, the BaBoon probably took that bit of
> > > advice long ago, old girl.
> > Shhh! is a demostrably better writer than you are.
>
> Jilly makes fewer writing mistakes than you do and when she does they're usually
> typos.
I don't know of any woman named Jilly here. Maybe she is a good
writer, maybe she isn't.
We were talking about Shhh! Shhh! is a solid writer.
>
> Your mistakes, however, tend to be thought-process errors along the lines of
> "serious of careers" when it properly should have been "series of careers"
> undoubtedly due to misfiring synapses from all that aspartame over the years.
No, not undoubtedly. That would be a lie unless you are a doctor. Are
you a doctor? Or are you a liar?
Boon
> Marcy kvetched:
>
> > [GeoSynch The Greatest] wrote:
> > > Marcy groused:
> > There's another incorrect choice of verb.
>
> Is it really, Marcy?
Yes, it is. Your writing abilities are far below average. You write
like a college freshman who lives and dies by the thesaurus.
>
> > > Couldn't leave The MidYut out of the tussle.
> > There is no such thing as a MidYut.
>
> Doug Haugen concocted that moniker for 'lil Georgie (and that one, too.). ;-)
In other words, you're not smart enough to come up with these
nicknames on your own. Got it.
Boon
> BaBoon "noticed":
>
> >> > Are you aware that you suffer from ASD?
> > > More armchair psychology from a failed amateur?
> > I noticed you failed to answer the question. Very interesting.
>
> I'm not inclined to answer whatever idiotic questions you may pose.
>
> But I do recall reading several years ago that a sign of autism in children was
> that they would have hysterical tantrums if they perceived an object in their
> environment (like a toy in their room or something) had been disturbed.
That is not a definitive sign of autism.
You fit
> that description with your tendency to go apeguano whenever somebody like Scott
> or Arny or Bret or me posts anything on rao.
Provide an example.
You get violently deranged and try
> to chase them off rao like some berserk little chimp.
That's not an accurate assessment at all. How does one become
violently deranged through writing? Could you provide an example of me
becoming violently deranged on RAO?
The truth is that you create this fantasy of me becoming violently
deranged so that you can justify your petty sniping and ankle biting
behaviors. You perceive yourself as "doing right," yet you're an
outcast and largely ignored and ridiculed. That's quixotic behavior in
a nutshell.
Boon
> Buffoon burbled:
No, I didn't "burble."
>
> > "Burble" would only be a correct choice if we were speaking. A written word
> > cannot be burbled.
>
> The MidYut had a propensity for using that word in that same context. Did you
> ever try to correct 'lil Georgie for doing so? Why not, reeking hypocrite?
>
> > Do you think you have NPD or ASD?
>
> No, but I'm beginning to think you do.
Ah, classic projection behavior. That's very revealing.
>
> > It's possible to have both, you know.
>
> Is it really?
Yes.
>
> >> > In fact, why do most people's jokes fly over your head?
> > > Proving what a pathological liar you are by immediately believing whatever
> > > lie you just recently make up.
> >Just prove that I lied. That's all you have to do...for once.
>
> Does the braggadocio claim of 150,000 readers that you couldn't substantiate
> when called to account ring a bell?
No, it doesn't. Those figures were not available through online
sources because of the nature of PDF downloads. You could not accept
that explanation. If you had contacted Jeff Dorgay and asked for those
figures, he might have sent them to you if he felt you were a
legitimate and potential advertiser.
But that would have revealed your true identity. Your legendary
cowardice prevented you from making that move so you took the safe
route of saying I lied. But here's the simple truth: if those numbers
were available online, it would have been easy for you to find them
and post them. But you didn't. Why? Because I was right and you were
wrong.
Checkmate.
>
> > I was teasing Lionel. Others knew I was teasing Lionel. Why are you the only
> > one who doesn't see this? Are your fantasies preventing you from accepting
> > reality?
>
> No matter how vigorously your nose gets rubbed in it, you still fantastically
> think you come up smelling like a rose.
Actually, I'm just smarter than anonymous trolls like you and Lionel.
It's that simple.
>
> >> > Is it because you suffer from ASD and you are unable to undersatnd social
> >> > cues from others?
> > Here you're asking (and in the other post proclaiming) making a mockery of it.
> > That sentence is not correct. If you remove the parenthetical phrase, you're
> > saying "asking making a mockery of it." That makes no sense. Try again.
>
> Alright. Here you asking (whether I have ASD) and in another post you are
> proclaiming (that I have ASD), thereby making a mockery out of both claims.
Where do I proclaim that you have ASD? I believe that you do, but I
could not prove it. I am not a licensed mental health care
professional, so I cannot offer an official diagnosis.
Then again, you don't have to be a doctor to know someone has broken
the arm...especially if the bone is sticking out. You ASD is as
obvious as that bone. Normal, happy and well-adjusted people don't act
the way you do.
>
> >> > The two behavioral therapists who are reviewing your posts seem to think
> >> > so.
> > Since your armchair psychology attempts have been discredited as those of a
> > failed amateur, you now turn to higher authorities to bolster your feeble
> > claims.
> > That's not true. I pegged Scott as having Aspergers, and to this day he has
> > not disputed this. I pegged Arny as having NPD, and a psychiatrist friend of
> > mine said that I had "pegged it." Bratzi won't admit to being autistic, but
> > his behaviors are so representative of ASD that he'd probably "peg the meters"
> > if he took an assessment test.
>
> If they do, in fact, exist and are, in fact, qualified, I wonder what they would
> make of your compulsion to flamefest on rao be it with Arny or Bobo or Scott or
> Bret or me or whoever, nobody else engages in the incendiary, scorched-earth
> guerrilla warfare with the same gusto as you have for it.
Really? You don't exist here solely to attack others?
I participate in music and audio threads. You don't.
I have plenty of people with whom I conduct civil, pleasant exchanges.
You don't.
There goes that poor self-awareness again, a symptom of your ASD.
>
> > > Whether they exist or not and whether you'd report only negative assessments
> > > and overlook any others is automatically called into account because you
> > > have no credibility as a journalistic purveyor.
> > That's not true either. In your eyes I have no credibility, and yet I still
> > write for a living. Your fantasy construct where I have failed at several
> > careers isn't even close to the truth. Unlike you, I have experience in
> > several areas, which makes me extremely valuable in the job market. I have 20
> > years of management experience, 8 years of telecommunications experience and
> > 12 years of writing and editing experience. I currently own my own business
> > and have eight clients. I made much more money in 2009 than 2008. There is no
> > failure in my life.
>
> Then why were you moaning to Scott you couldn't afford healthcare for your
> "special needs" offspring?
I didn't say that. I said I'm for more affordable healthcare. Scott
made the mistake of saying I couldn't afford it. You're making the
same dumb mistake he is.
>
> > If you lost your job tomorrow, it would be quite a battle for you to find
> > another one. Your lack of interpersonal skills disqualifies you from any sort
> > of leadership role. The job you have now is probably as good as it gets.
>
> Yes, indeed, it is, which is why I've been at the same place for so long.
See. that's the mark of a follower rather than a leader. Truly
successful people don't stay in one place for a long time. They need
new challenges. You're a drone, a worker bee. You stay put because you
know you're lucky to have the job you have.
I've
> been offered leadership positions on more than one occasion but I've declined
> because I like what I do.
That's because you're a drone, a worker bee. You know you would fail
as a leader.
It's mentally challenging, but relatively easy for me,
> as it provides an ideal venue for my creative problem-solving abilities working
> with large databases and conceptualizing and implementing robust,
> near-bulletproof programming solutions. It's a natural high in and of itself.
It also requires little interaction with others. Most people with ASD
excel at those types of jobs.
Boon
> Buffoon bumbled:
>
> > "Bumbled" is not an appropriate verb here.
>
> The BaBoon endeavored into another quixotic misadventure critiquing my posting
> prefaces.
Because like most of your writing, they induce the gag reflex.
>
> > > OK, Marcy it is then.
> > Considering that's not my name, I probably won't respond to it.
>
> But you just did. LoL!
No, not really. I responded to your post.
>
> >> > "BaBoon" is destitute and has failed at a serious [sic] of careers
> > > Seriously failed, I'd say, displaying yet again another thought-process
> > > error.
> > Considering I just pointed out one of your typos, the same can be said about
> > you.
>
> There's a difference between typos and the thought-process errors you commit all
> too frequently.
Typos are caused by "thought process errors." Demostrably so.
There is also the fact that as a professional writer, I don't feel the
need to deliver perfect prose unless I'm paid for it.
>
> >> > and "Pudge" is on the verge of suicide.
> > Since Boy George abruptly stopped posting the day after Christmas, it was not
> > an unreasonable assumption.
> > Yes, it's a very unreasonable assumption.
>
> No, it isn't, not in Pudge's case, anyway.
Wrong. It's not reasonable in any case.
>
> > Many people have left RAO over the years and not one of them, to my knowledge,
> > has committed suicide.
>
> But none of them posted practically obsessively each and every day for 15 or so
> years as did Pudge.
George has taken breaks in the past. No one made a deal about them
back then.
If you look carefully at George's posts over the last few months, it
was fairly obvious that he was becoming bored with the place. I think
the departure of Arny may have had a lot to do with that.
>
> > The behavioral therapists told me something interesting.
>
> Something far more interesting today on Natural News via the UK Telegraph site:
> "Proposed updates to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders
> (DSM) are prompting many to question whether or not the psychiatric profession
> itself has gone crazy."http://www.naturalnews.com/028529_psychiatry_mental_illness.html
>
> The psychiatry profession has devolved from whatever therapeutic legitimacy it
> once had to being little more than street-corner drug peddlers for Big Pharma.
> What's your "behavioral therapists" reaction to that?
So you're going to use a quote from some blog to dispel an entire
medical discipline? That's pretty dumb.
Boon
People with ASD tend not to read for pleasure. They do enjoy visual
arts, but they have a hard time interpreting hidden meanings,
symbolism, tone and overall themes in books. So it's perfectly natural
that you don't like to read unless it can make you more money.
Boon
> > Is it really, Marcy?
Men calling other men by feminized versions of their names (i.e. Marcy
for Marc) is a very common practice among homosexuals.
If you're gay and you want to call me Marcy, I certainly won't mind.
Just be honest about it.
Boon
>
> > Something far more interesting today on Natural News via the UK Telegraph site:
> > "Proposed updates to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders
> > (DSM) are prompting many to question whether or not the psychiatric profession
> > itself has gone crazy."http://www.naturalnews.com/028529_psychiatry_mental_illness.html
>
> > The psychiatry profession has devolved from whatever therapeutic legitimacy it
> > once had to being little more than street-corner drug peddlers for Big Pharma.
> > What's your "behavioral therapists" reaction to that?
Behavioral therapists, by definition, do not decribe drugs. Generally
they are psychologists and psychotherapists. Psychiatrists are
MDs...they are the one who prescribe drugs.
Your blog article is about psychiatry, moron.
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
> We were talking about Shhh! Shhh! is a solid writer.
Aw, gwan.
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
> So you're going to use a quote from some blog to dispel an entire
> medical discipline? That's pretty dumb.
Guys like 2pid and Senator Sugar consider daily "reading" where they
"learn" stuff.
And they can read it without turning off Romper Room or Sesame Street!
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
Make sure he doesn't step on your toe in the men's room though.
Boon
So tell me...you wrote this elsewhere in the thread:
"Here you're asking (and in the other post proclaiming) making a
mockery of it."
How many thought process errors did it take to commit that train
wreck? How many of your synapses misfired to make that look acceptable
to you before you pushed the send button?
GeoSynch
Responding to your own post while trying to cover up that fact with some
ham-handed sleight of hand?
What a REEKING HYPOCRITE! Ahhhh-ha-ha-ha!
GeoSynch
> > You get violently deranged and try to chase them off rao like some berserk
> > little chimp.
> That's not an accurate assessment at all. How does one become violently
> deranged through writing? Could you provide an example of me becoming
> violently deranged on RAO?
Does the phrase "I'm going to kick your ass all over the parking lot" ring a
bell, monkeyboy?
Boon
Um, no. What a stupid thing to say.
>
> What a REEKING HYPOCRITE! Ahhhh-ha-ha-ha!
Wow. You're really grasping at straws at this point. I guess the well
has run dry.
GeoSynch
> > Something far more interesting today on Natural News via the UK Telegraph
> > site:
> > "Proposed updates to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental
> > Disorders
> > (DSM) are prompting many to question whether or not the psychiatric
> > profession
> > itself has gone
> > crazy."http://www.naturalnews.com/028529_psychiatry_mental_illness.html
>
> > The psychiatry profession has devolved from whatever therapeutic legitimacy
> > it
> > once had to being little more than street-corner drug peddlers for Big
> > Pharma.
> > What's your "behavioral therapists" reaction to that?
> Behavioral therapists, by definition, do not decribe drugs.
Responding to another of your own posts yet again.
Weren't you bleating something about that not too long ago, reeking hypocrite?
Boon
No, it doesn't.
But if we met in person, I'm sure you'd be crying like a woman inside
of five minutes.
Boon
No, I just thought of something else to rub your nose in. Again you
avoid admitting your mistake.
>
> Weren't you bleating something about that not too long ago, reeking hypocrite?
That's different. You didn't have a point. You never do.
GeoSynch
> Because I was right and you were wrong.
> Checkmate.
Not even close, pretender. Here's the *real* checkmate move:
> > If they do, in fact, exist and are, in fact, qualified, I wonder what they
> > would make of your compulsion to flamefest on rao be it with Arny or Bobo or
> > Scott or Bret or me or whoever, nobody else engages in the incendiary,
> > scorched-earth guerrilla warfare with the same gusto as you have for it.
And you conceded the match by not responding and then the tournament as well by
refraining from mentioning those so-called "behavior therapists" any further in
your flurry of posts (except once en passant).
Better luck next time, bumbler.
Boon
> Buffoon in zugzwang:
>
> > Because I was right and you were wrong.
> > Checkmate.
>
> Not even close, pretender. Here's the *real* checkmate move:
What, after snipping my point? What a cowardly move.
>
> > > If they do, in fact, exist and are, in fact, qualified, I wonder what they
> > > would make of your compulsion to flamefest on rao be it with Arny or Bobo or
> > > Scott or Bret or me or whoever, nobody else engages in the incendiary,
> > > scorched-earth guerrilla warfare with the same gusto as you have for it.
>
> And you conceded the match by not responding and then the tournament as well by
> refraining from mentioning those so-called "behavior therapists" any further in
> your flurry of posts (except once en passant).
You've either lost your mind or you're a terrible writer. Are you able
to string together logical statements in order to prove your point?
>
> Better luck next time, bumbler.
Truth by assertion. You have yet to score a single point against me.
The problem is your ASD makes you think you're scoring points, when
you're actually making nonsensical, illogical statements and then
laughing like a hyena. Sorry, but that fools no one except you.
You look like an idiot right now.
GeoSynch
> > Does the phrase "I'm going to kick your ass all over the parking lot" ring a
> > bell, monkeyboy?
> No, it doesn't.
Perhaps it no longer does to you because you've lost your mind.
> But if we met in person, I'm sure you'd be crying like a woman inside of five
> minutes.
Well, then again, perhaps you do remember, after all. ;-)
GeoSynch
> > Responding to your own post while trying to cover up that fact with some
> > ham-handed sleight of hand?
> Um, no.
Um yes.
> What a stupid thing to say.
You may be deluding yourself but not anyone else.
> > What a REEKING HYPOCRITE! Ahhhh-ha-ha-ha!
> Wow. You're really grasping at straws at this point. I guess the well has run
> dry.
No, just vigorously rubbing your nose in it and mirthfully watching you come up
thinking that you still smell like a rose, Marcy.
Boon
> Buffoon blubbered:
>
> > > Does the phrase "I'm going to kick your ass all over the parking lot" ring a
> > > bell, monkeyboy?
> > No, it doesn't.
>
> Perhaps it no longer does to you because you've lost your mind.
I'm still waiting for a URL to the Google archives. Funny how you
haven't supplied that yet.
>
> > But if we met in person, I'm sure you'd be crying like a woman inside of five
> > minutes.
>
> Well, then again, perhaps you do remember, after all. ;-)
You would have a lot to account for. I would jump at the chance to
meet you in person. Then again, it doesn't take a violent or deranged
person to understand that some people deserve a good ass whippin' now
and again. Since you're not a heterosexual male, you don't get that.
Boon
> Buffoon may be losing sight as well as mind:
>
> > > Responding to your own post while trying to cover up that fact with some
> > > ham-handed sleight of hand?
> > Um, no.
>
> Um yes.
>
> > What a stupid thing to say.
>
> You may be deluding yourself but not anyone else.
I'm not deluding myself. You know why? Look around. Who's clapping you
on the back, telling you how clever you are? No one? There's a reason
for that.
That's because as a person with ASD, you have no self-awareness. You
don't quite realize when you've been ridiculed. When people laugh at
you, your stock response is "people are stupid."
Those are very autistic behaviors.
>
> > > What a REEKING HYPOCRITE! Ahhhh-ha-ha-ha!
> > Wow. You're really grasping at straws at this point. I guess the well has run
> > dry.
>
> No, just vigorously rubbing your nose in it and mirthfully watching you come up
> thinking that you still smell like a rose, Marcy.
A straight male wouldn't write such pungent, puling tripe.
GeoSynch
> So tell me...you wrote this elsewhere in the thread:
"Here you're asking (and in the other post proclaiming) making a
mockery of it."
Yes, I did write that and you brought it up previously and I took a stab at
correcting it and now you're bringing it up again anew as though for the first
time.
Are you going Loony Tunes again?
GeoSynch
> > We were talking about Shhh! Shhh! is a solid writer.
> Aw, gwan.
Like ... oh puke.
Boon
No, just vigorously rubbing your nose in it and mirthfully watching
you come up thinking that you still smell like a rose, reeking
hypocrite.
ROTFLMAO!
GeoSynch
>> > > Responding to your own post while trying to cover up that fact with some
>> > > ham-handed sleight of hand?
>> > Um, no.
> > Um yes.
>> > What a stupid thing to say.
> > You may be deluding yourself but not anyone else.
> I'm not deluding myself.
Yes, you are. You responded to your own post and now you're spinning like a top
trying to deflect or deny it.
You lose. Again.
Boon
Yes, as someone with ASD, you're uncomfortable and unfamiliar with the
giving and receiving of compliments. See, the normal people often say
nice things to each other when they deserve it. You, on the other
hand, live in a world full of "stupid people" who don't "get" or
"appreciate" you.
That's because you're a rude, bitter simpleton who spends his nights
and weekends lashing out at people who are more cultured, educated and
intelligent. But they're stupid. None of those people know how to
check automated reports for errors in the middle of the night. Yeah,
they're real stupid. You're so smart.
Boon
No, I'm not.
>
> You lose. Again.
No, I haven't.
GeoSynch
>> > Because I was right and you were wrong.
>> > Checkmate.
> > Not even close, pretender. Here's the *real* checkmate move:
> What, after snipping my point? What a cowardly move.
Your deflective "point" ("Really? You don't exist here solely to attack
others?") was irrelevant to the question of what those so-called "behavior
therapists" would make of your flamefest compulsion. This is something that you
yourself can not face, because it causes you - what's that psychological term
for it ... oh yes - cognitive dissonance.
GeoSynch
> > Are you going Loony Tunes again?
> No, just vigorously rubbing your nose in it and mirthfully watching you come
> up thinking that you still smell like a rose, reeking hypocrite.
Good little monkey; monkeyboy want banana? :-)
GeoSynch
>> > > We were talking about Shhh! Shhh! is a solid writer.
>> > Aw, gwan.
> > Like ... oh puke.
> Yes, as someone with ASD, you're uncomfortable and unfamiliar with the giving
> and receiving of compliments.
Why don't you two go get a room or something?
GeoSynch
> > You lose. Again.
> No, I haven't.
Filibuster all you want, but you did respond to yourself and you do lose. Again.
Boon
> Buffoon's going Loony Tunes:
>
> >> > Because I was right and you were wrong.
> >> > Checkmate.
> > > Not even close, pretender. Here's the *real* checkmate move:
> > What, after snipping my point? What a cowardly move.
>
> Your deflective "point" ("Really? You don't exist here solely to attack
> others?")
No, I don't. Do you see me attacking Shhh!? Jenn? Clyde? George?
Anyone else here who actually discusses audio?
> was irrelevant to the question of what those so-called "behavior
> therapists" would make of your flamefest compulsion.
That has to be a rhetorical question, one that is really dumb. How
would I know what behavior therapists think of anything? What would
the response be? There isn't one.
This is something that you
> yourself can not face, because it causes you - what's that psychological term
> for it ... oh yes - cognitive dissonance.
No, it doesn't. So far the behavior therapists see no problem with my
posting behaviors. I'm trying to steer an audio discussion group
toward audio discussions, and I'm discouraging those who are only here
to flame and troll. That's normal behavior in a discussion group.
Attacking others anonymously and making up outrageous lies (as you do)
is clearly not acceptable or normal behavior. Period.
Boon
Sorry, but no. I simply saw something else to respond to in your post.
There's nothing wrong with that. I know you are eager to score your
first point against me, but it will have to be another day.
GeoSynch
>> > What, after snipping my point? What a cowardly move.
> > Your deflective "point" ("Really? You don't exist here solely to attack
> > others?")
> No, I don't. Do you see me attacking Shhh!? Jenn? Clyde? George? Anyone else
> here who actually discusses audio?
That was you making that statement, bumbler, that I'm quoting.
Are you arguing with yourself again, lunatic?
Like ... SCORE! BIG-TIME SCORE!!! CHA-CHINGH-CHINGH-CHINGHH!!!
BWAAAAAAAAHAAAAAAAAHAAAAAAAAA!!!
GeoSynch
First this:
> How would I know what behavior therapists think of anything?
Immediately followed by this:
> So far the behavior therapists see no problem with my posting behaviors.
And there you have it, Loony Tune Buffoon talking out of both sides of his
personality disorder.
Have they come up with a clinical definition for your dementia? I suggest
Solipsistic Personality Disorder.
Boon
> Buffoon's definitely going Loony Tunes:
>
> >> > What, after snipping my point? What a cowardly move.
> > > Your deflective "point" ("Really? You don't exist here solely to attack
> > > others?")
> > No, I don't. Do you see me attacking Shhh!? Jenn? Clyde? George? Anyone else
> > here who actually discusses audio?
>
> That was you making that statement, bumbler, that I'm quoting.
You're an idiot. You made the point that I was here to attack others.
I replied with the above quote. Therefore it is an appropriate
response.
>
> Are you arguing with yourself again, lunatic?
No. You do have an obsession with accusing others of arguing with
themselves. This extremely weak argument always seems to appear
whenever you have your back to the wall. Look at this entire thread
objectively (a tall order, since your ASD prevents you from doing so),
and you'll see point after point where you've lost, deflected or
merely given up without a response. But here you are trying to claim
victory because you think I'm responding to myself.
Responding more than once to a post is fine if you're addressing
another point that was missed the first time. No one in their right
mind would think otherwise.
>
> Like ... SCORE! BIG-TIME SCORE!!! CHA-CHINGH-CHINGH-CHINGHH!!!
>
> BWAAAAAAAAHAAAAAAAAHAAAAAAAAA!!!
Talk about going berserk! LoL!
Sorry, pal...you lose. Again.
Boon
> Buffoon goes schizoid:
>
> First this:
>
> > How would I know what behavior therapists think of anything?
>
> Immediately followed by this:
>
> > So far the behavior therapists see no problem with my posting behaviors.
>
> And there you have it, Loony Tune Buffoon talking out of both sides of his
> personality disorder.
Um, wrong again. Again your ASD has limited your ability to understand
written communication.
In the first statement, I say that I cannot tell what other human
beings are thinking. That's a perfectly legitimate and correct
statement.
In the second statement, I say that the behavior therapists have no
problem with my posting behaviors because they have told me so. Again,
it's a perfectly legitimate statement that does not counter the first.
>
> Have they come up with a clinical definition for your dementia? I suggest
> Solipsistic Personality Disorder.
Sorry, pal...you lose again.
Usually when you fall apart like this you wind up saying something
like "Okay, everyone...I'm taking a break! Back in a few months."
That's the sign of your utter defeat. I have to imagine you're very
close to that now. I can sense the growing desperation (and sloppy
thinking patterns) in your posts. You're making less and less sense,
and becoming more and more agitated.
Don't do this to yourself. Since you have nothing to contribute to the
group, and since you're simply too dumb to participate, just leave. No
one will think any less of you (mostly because it's not possible to
think any less of you at this point...you're a major loser).
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
You're right, Boon. The Senator is losing it.
Boon
This whole "responding to myself" jag is beyond dumb. There are many
reasons to respond to the same post more than once. First, you need to
make a correction. Second, you need to elaborate. Third, you see
something the second time that you didn't see the first and you want
to respond to that specific point (which was the case here).
So how does one feel compelled to yell "CHA-CHING" and "SCORE" when
this happens? It's not something a normal person would do or think.
Never has PLF's autism been so obvious. It also shows how desperate
he's become...he's clinging to his last feeble arguments, and they're
slipping away.
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
I admit that it's my fault. We hit a nerve with him and now he's
generalized the point to ANY instance of resonding to one's self:
12. Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! View profile
More options Apr 7, 2:46 am
Newsgroups: rec.audio.opinion
From: "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" <artygu...@hotmail.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2010 00:46:48 -0700 (PDT)
Local: Wed, Apr 7 2010 2:46 am
Subject: Re: The little chimp went berserk
On Apr 7, 2:07 am, "GeoSynch" <SpamSla...@Casablanca.com> wrote:
> GeoSynch [The Greatest] observed:
> > Marcie and Jilly trade beauty secrets:
> >>> "I, on the other hand, have lovely skin."
> >>> "People can't believe I'm the age I am."
> >>> "I have almost no grey hair."
> >>> "[M]y face is free from wrinkle or blemishes."
> >> (I frequently get complimented on the softness of my skin. It drives
> >> women into paroxysms of delight when they touch it. They always ask me
> >> what lotions and cleansers I use. "You must use the expensive stuff!
> >> Your skin is flawless!" they always say. They cannot believe it when I
> >> tell them I don't use any. None at all. That always drives them into
> >> paroxysms of jealousy.)
> > Sounds like a couple of hussies about to get into a catfight real soon. ;-)
> And Boy George, incapacitated with another debilititating homo disease, isn't
> around to referee this impending melee.
Yes, Boon, a nerve has been severely struck.
A double response to this one shows how piercing this is to Senator
Sugar's frail ego. He's probably whimpering and trying to wring his
beard out right now.
Why are some people born with clear, glowing skin, and others reduced
to impatiently tapping their shoes on the floors of random men's
rooms? It just doesn't seem fair.
Boon
Wow...he responded to himself. CHA-CHING!!! SCORE!!!
>
> Yes, Boon, a nerve has been severely struck.
I'm wondering if he has the intestinal fortitude to show up for
another night of abuse.
>
> A double response to this one shows how piercing this is to Senator
> Sugar's frail ego. He's probably whimpering and trying to wring his
> beard out right now.
I think he's crying like a little girl. But your description is more
eloquent. And your skin, by the way, is lovely and glowing tonight.
>
> Why are some people born with clear, glowing skin, and others reduced
> to impatiently tapping their shoes on the floors of random men's
> rooms? It just doesn't seem fair.
Your average IT drone is pretty scary. I bet he hasn't seen a naked
woman since his last sojourn to Tijuana.
GeoSynch
> This whole "responding to myself" jag is beyond dumb. There are many reasons
> to respond to the same post more than once. First, you need to make a
> correction. Second, you need to elaborate.
That's what I did a few posts back in this thread and Jilly drooled:
=====================================================
> > Sounds like a couple of hussies about to get into a catfight real soon. ;-)
>
> And Boy George, incapacitated with another debilititating homo disease, isn't
> around to referee this impending melee.
Yes, Boon, a nerve has been severely struck.
A double response to this one shows
=====================================================
So did you go all apeguano on her for it? No? Why not? Because you're a reeking
hypocrite.
> So how does one feel compelled to yell "CHA-CHING" and "SCORE" when this
> happens?
You were caught out arguing with yourself again which is completely different
than responding to your own post.
> It's not something a normal person would do or think.
If you mean arguing with yourself, then yes, I agree, that's not something a
normal person would do, but an unhinged lunatic on the other hand...
> Never has PLF's autism been so obvious. It also shows how desperate he's
> become...he's clinging to his last feeble arguments, and they're slipping
> away.
Reaching ever deeper into that stale bag of debating trade tricks is far more
indicative of your increasing desperation.
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
> Reaching ever deeper into that stale bag
Nobody is interested in your sexual exploits, Senator Sugar.
You apparently go for older men?
GeoSynch
> > > Sounds like a couple of hussies about to get into a catfight real soon.
> > > ;-)
> > And Boy George, incapacitated with another debilititating homo disease,
> > isn't
> > around to referee this impending melee.
> Wow...he responded to himself. CHA-CHING!!! SCORE!!!
But I didn't argue with myself like you did.
So, sorry but no score, no cha-ching and no banana for you on this one.
> I'm wondering if he has the intestinal fortitude to show up for another night
> of abuse.
And pass up the chance to make a monkey out of you all over again.
> I think he's crying like a little girl.
More debating trade tricks on your part by trying to pre-empt something I've
specifically said about you many times in the past (namely, sock a schoolyard
bully like you in the nose and you go running crying like a little schoolgirl)
while the only thing you can do is use the same old tired debating trade jargon
you've used against Arny, Scott, Bobo, Bret and practically every other
antagonist.
> But your description is more eloquent. And your skin, by the way, is lovely
> and glowing tonight.
"I, on the other hand, have lovely skin," gushed Marcy Phillips.
GeoSynch
>> >> > What, after snipping my point? What a cowardly move.
> > > > Your deflective "point" ("Really? You don't exist here solely to attack
> > > > others?")
>> > No, I don't. Do you see me attacking Shhh!? Jenn? Clyde? George? Anyone
>> > else here who actually discusses audio?
> > That was you making that statement, bumbler, that I'm quoting.
> You're an idiot. You made the point that I was here to attack others. I
> replied with the above quote. Therefore it is an appropriate response.
No, imbecile, you made the statement "Really? You don't exist here solely to
attack others?" that I'm quoting you as having made. Go back and reread your own
post (a few posts prior back) if you must to see that you in fact did make that
statement. Your response of "No, I don't. Do you see me attacking Shhh!? Jenn?
Clyde? George?" is in response to the question that you yourself posed of
"Really? You don't exist here solely to attack others?"
YOU ARE ARGUING WITH YOURSELF. And yet you're still seemingly to idiotic to
realize it. Even now or so it would appear.
> > Are you arguing with yourself again, lunatic?
> No. You do have an obsession with accusing others of arguing with themselves.
I've just proven it that you are in fact arguing with yourself. Absolutely no
doubt about it to anyone other than you, perhaps.
> This extremely weak argument always seems to appear whenever you have your
> back to the wall.
We've been down this road before in the past, where I've nailed you arguing with
yourself. And you denied it, obfuscated it, danced around it, but with the
relentless pressure hammering away at you, you finally cracked and admitted
that, yes, you were arguing with yourself, and then immediately tried to
rationalize it away as something others have done, so no big deal, etc and then
later on you're back denying all over again that you argued with yourself.
> Look at this entire thread objectively (a tall order, since your ASD prevents
> you from doing so),
OSAF which a failed amateur like you is unqualified to make.
> and you'll see point after point where you've lost, deflected or merely given
> up without a response.
Those bleatings of premature victory are your delusions getting the better of
you.
> But here you are trying to claim victory because you think I'm responding to
> myself.
You're arguing with yourself, not merely responding to yourself.
> Responding more than once to a post is fine if you're addressing another point
> that was missed the first time. No one in their right mind would think
> otherwise.
I agree there, which is why I followed up on my post with Boy George refereeing
the Marcy and Jilly catfight. But then one of you two bozos tried to give me
grief for responding to one of my own posts, so I decided to return the favor
when you responded to your own posts on multiple occasions. And then you started
getting bent all out of shape over it, which is par for the course for a reeking
hypocrite.
> > Like ... SCORE! BIG-TIME SCORE!!! CHA-CHINGH-CHINGH-CHINGHH!!!
> > BWAAAAAAAAHAAAAAAAAHAAAAAAAAA!!!
> Talk about going berserk! LoL!
That's precisely what you did. You've always had an easy time of it with Arny,
Bobo, Scott and others, but not with me, for more often than not, I get the
better of you and that just drives your solipsistic self ballistic. It was my
"Here's the *real* checkmate move:" that sent you off into a red-misted frenzy
resulting in the horrendous blunder of arguing with yourself wherein you didn't
even recognize something you yourself had written shortly beforehand and your
arrogant hubristic derangement erupted with you arguing with yourself.
> Sorry, pal...you lose. Again.
No, chumley. You did. Again.
GeoSynch
> > First this:
>> > How would I know what behavior therapists think of anything?
> > Immediately followed by this:
> > > So far the behavior therapists see no problem with my posting behaviors.
>> And there you have it, Loony Tune Buffoon talking out of both sides of his
>> personality disorder.
> Um, wrong again. Again your ASD has limited your ability to understand written
> communication.
> In the first statement, I say that I cannot tell what other human beings are
> thinking. That's a perfectly legitimate and correct statement.
> In the second statement, I say that the behavior therapists have no problem
> with my posting behaviors because they have told me so. Again, it's a
> perfectly legitimate statement that does not counter the first.
Did you ask them what they *thought* of your *posting behavior*? The second
statement invalidates the first. Logic isn't your strong suit, is it?
> > Have they come up with a clinical definition for your dementia? I suggest
> > Solipsistic Personality Disorder.
> Sorry, pal...you lose again.
Logic would say otherwise, monkeyboy.
> Usually when you fall apart like this you wind up saying something like "Okay,
> everyone...I'm taking a break! Back in a few months." That's the sign of your
> utter defeat. I have to imagine you're very close to that now. I can sense the
> growing desperation (and sloppy thinking patterns) in your posts. You're
> making less and less sense, and becoming more and more agitated.
> Don't do this to yourself. Since you have nothing to contribute to the group,
> and since you're simply too dumb to participate, just leave.
Now there's the real desperation creeping in. You are reaching ever deeper into
that stale old bag of debating trade tricks in an attempt to save your monkey
face. The same old recycled phrases and stock boilerplate you've used against
every real and imagined antagonist.
Boon
> BaBoon howled:
>
> > This whole "responding to myself" jag is beyond dumb. There are many reasons
> > to respond to the same post more than once. First, you need to make a
> > correction. Second, you need to elaborate.
>
> That's what I did a few posts back in this thread and Jilly drooled:
>
> =====================================================
>
> > > Sounds like a couple of hussies about to get into a catfight real soon. ;-)
>
> > And Boy George, incapacitated with another debilititating homo disease, isn't
> > around to referee this impending melee.
>
> Yes, Boon, a nerve has been severely struck.
>
> A double response to this one shows
> =====================================================
The second post wasn't an elaboration or a correction...it was simply
more of the same, tired dreck. It was superfluous at best and idiotic
at worst.
>
> So did you go all apeguano on her for it? No? Why not? Because you're a reeking
> hypocrite.
Her? Who are you talking about? Is that another typo? LoL!
>
> > So how does one feel compelled to yell "CHA-CHING" and "SCORE" when this
> > happens?
>
> You were caught out arguing with yourself again which is completely different
> than responding to your own post.
No, I wasn't arguing with myself. This is a tired old debating trade
trick of yours. You always pull this out when you have nothing left to
say and your back is against the wall.
>
> > It's not something a normal person would do or think.
>
> If you mean arguing with yourself, then yes, I agree, that's not something a
> normal person would do, but an unhinged lunatic on the other hand...
Blah blah blah, debating trade trick, blah blah blah.
>
> > Never has PLF's autism been so obvious. It also shows how desperate he's
> > become...he's clinging to his last feeble arguments, and they're slipping
> > away.
>
> Reaching ever deeper into that stale bag of debating trade tricks is far more
> indicative of your increasing desperation.
"Desperation"? Haven't you complained when I've used that word to
describe you, reeking hypocrite?
LoL!
Boon
> The vines grow ever more slippery for monkeyboy swinging through trees:
Ah, how nice. The autistic boy is trying to write snappy, humorous
sentences.
>
> > > > Sounds like a couple of hussies about to get into a catfight real soon.
> > > > ;-)
> > > And Boy George, incapacitated with another debilititating homo disease,
> > > isn't
> > > around to referee this impending melee.
> > Wow...he responded to himself. CHA-CHING!!! SCORE!!!
>
> But I didn't argue with myself like you did.
Look at poor PLF, clinging to the last argument he has like a child
with a lollipop. He's been revealed as having ASD, he's been
outsmarted, and the only thing he has left is the accusation that
everyone is arguing with themselves.
Here's a test. Say the following out loud:
"Yay! I got you to argue with yourself! I win! CHA-CHING! SCORE!"
Say it to people in the real world. Note their expressions. Oh, wait.
You have ASD. You can't understand things like body language, sarcasm
and irony. That's okay. Just tell us when people say things like
"You're right" or "You win!"
Go ahead, do it. See what kind of responses you get to that feeble,
worthless and desperate argument. It's the argument of an autistic
person. It makes no sense to normal people.
>
> So, sorry but no score, no cha-ching and no banana for you on this one.
>
> > I'm wondering if he has the intestinal fortitude to show up for another night
> > of abuse.
>
> And pass up the chance to make a monkey out of you all over again.
Oh really? Who else here thinks so? Who else here thinks that you
outsmart us, or trick us or win arguments against us? Name one
person.
Better yet, show your posts to your friends (ha ha), co-workers or
family. Be proud and show them what you do in your spare time. It's a
simple test...if they clap you on the back and say what a good job you
do, then you do make a monkey out of all of us. If they don't, and
they won't, this is all an empty, worthless defense mechanism.
You don't anger anyone here. You don't outsmart anyone here. You don't
win any arguments here. You're autistic.
Look at yourself (if you can). You're pitied, ignored and ridiculed on
a constant basis. No one sticks up for you or aligns themselves on
your side. No one even responds to you unless they are mocking you,
challenging you or outsmarting you. And you seem to like it, since you
can't seem to tear yourself away. That's pretty weird. Then again,
people with ASD do very strange days in their daily lives. They get
into routines and they can't break them. That's why even though you
say things like "I'm taking a break...see you in a few months," it's
very easy to troll you and get you to come right back. Like Scott,
you're addicted to the abuse you receive here. Does that sound normal
to you? Better yet, does that sound normal to your friends, family and
co-workers?
>
> > I think he's crying like a little girl.
>
> More debating trade tricks on your part by trying to pre-empt something I've
> specifically said about you many times in the past (namely, sock a schoolyard
> bully like you in the nose and you go running crying like a little schoolgirl)
> while the only thing you can do is use the same old tired debating trade jargon
> you've used against Arny, Scott, Bobo, Bret and practically every other
> antagonist.
Translation: "WAAAAAAAAHHH!"
LoL!
>
> > But your description is more eloquent. And your skin, by the way, is lovely
> > and glowing tonight.
>
> "I, on the other hand, have lovely skin," gushed Marcy Phillips.
I don't know why you keep repeating your past mistakes like this.
That's a HUGE sign of autism, that you simply can't process new
information when you're still attached to the old, incorrect ideas. A
behavioral therapist can help you with these problem behaviors. I can
give you a referral if needed.
Boon
> Buffoon bumbled:
>
> >> >> > What, after snipping my point? What a cowardly move.
> > > > > Your deflective "point" ("Really? You don't exist here solely to attack
> > > > > others?")
> >> > No, I don't. Do you see me attacking Shhh!? Jenn? Clyde? George? Anyone
> >> > else here who actually discusses audio?
> > > That was you making that statement, bumbler, that I'm quoting.
> > You're an idiot. You made the point that I was here to attack others. I
> > replied with the above quote. Therefore it is an appropriate response.
>
> No, imbecile,
Imbecile? Really, more name calling? I guess that's all you have
left...name calling and accusing me of arguing with myself. That's
pretty sad.
you made the statement "Really? You don't exist here solely to
> attack others?" that I'm quoting you as having made. Go back and reread your own
> post (a few posts prior back) if you must to see that you in fact did make that
> statement. Your response of "No, I don't. Do you see me attacking Shhh!? Jenn?
> Clyde? George?" is in response to the question that you yourself posed of
> "Really? You don't exist here solely to attack others?"
Chalk it up to your poor writing skills then. I honestly could care
less what you wrote. Your confused ideas are buried in this sea of
mawkishness, so forgive me if I don't analyze every word. As someone
with ASD, you must be used to people not understaqnding what you say
or write. That's why you say things like "You're arguing with
yourself." You think it's because you have tricked people, when really
it's due to your somewhat convoluted sentence structure and strange
thought processes.
I bet you run into this in the real world as well. People are so
stupid, aren't they! Everything you write goes over people's heads!
LoL!
>
> YOU ARE ARGUING WITH YOURSELF.
Yes, PLF, we're all arguing with ourselves. You're such a master of
the written word that whenever we respond to you we're really
responding to ourselves! No one can argue with you! You're just too
brilliant!
Oh, what am I doing? You are autistic. You can't understand things
like sarcasm or irony. Sorry to confuse you. LoL!
And yet you're still seemingly to [sic] idiotic to
> realize it. Even now or so it would appear.
Do you know the difference between "too" and "to"? How many of your
synapses misfired to create that thought process error?
>
> > > Are you arguing with yourself again, lunatic?
> > No. You do have an obsession with accusing others of arguing with themselves.
>
> I've just proven it that you are in fact arguing with yourself. Absolutely no
> doubt about it to anyone other than you, perhaps.
Actually, you're the only one who believes this. Just you, an autistic
person. I can live with that.
>
> > This extremely weak argument always seems to appear whenever you have your
> > back to the wall.
>
> We've been down this road before in the past, where I've nailed you arguing with
> yourself.
Nope, sorry. We've been down this road before because this is what
magically pull out whenever your back is against the wall. It happens
every time. No one falls for it. No one cares. It's a weak, feeble
argument at best, and it reveals your weaknesses when it comes to the
debating trade.
Your autism will always betray you by making you commit the same
mistakes over and over.
And you denied it, obfuscated it, danced around it, but with the
> relentless pressure hammering away at you, you finally cracked and admitted
> that, yes, you were arguing with yourself, and then immediately tried to
> rationalize it away as something others have done, so no big deal, etc and then
> later on you're back denying all over again that you argued with yourself.
Wow, that's quite a fantasy you have there.
>
> > Look at this entire thread objectively (a tall order, since your ASD prevents
> > you from doing so),
>
> OSAF which a failed amateur like you is unqualified to make.
Nope...the two behavioral therapists have identified you, Scott and
Bratzi as providing classic symptoms of ASD.
>
> > and you'll see point after point where you've lost, deflected or merely given
> > up without a response.
>
> Those bleatings of premature victory are your delusions getting the better of
> you.
Oh, I won this argument a long time ago. You're just being contrary
now.
>
> > But here you are trying to claim victory because you think I'm responding to
> > myself.
>
> You're arguing with yourself, not merely responding to yourself.
Sure, whatever you say, autistic boy.
>
> > Responding more than once to a post is fine if you're addressing another point
> > that was missed the first time. No one in their right mind would think
> > otherwise.
>
> I agree there, which is why I followed up on my post with Boy George refereeing
> the Marcy and Jilly catfight.
Look at that sentence! You have to create fantasy versions of everyone
in order to talk about them. It's beyond your capabilities to refer to
people by their names or handles because you can't empower them as
real people. LoL! (That's another hint you're autistic, by the way.)
But then one of you two bozos tried to give me
> grief for responding to one of my own posts, so I decided to return the favor
> when you responded to your own posts on multiple occasions. And then you started
> getting bent all out of shape over it, which is par for the course for a reeking
> hypocrite.
Sure, we're all hypocrites.
Yet Shhh! and I have shown several instances of you responding to
yourself, making typos, all the things you rail against.
Like I said, autism prevents you from having any self-awareness.
>
> > > Like ... SCORE! BIG-TIME SCORE!!! CHA-CHINGH-CHINGH-CHINGHH!!!
> > > BWAAAAAAAAHAAAAAAAAHAAAAAAAAA!!!
> > Talk about going berserk! LoL!
>
> That's precisely what you did. You've always had an easy time of it with Arny,
> Bobo, Scott and others, but not with me, for more often than not, I get the
> better of you and that just drives your solipsistic self ballistic.
Yes, of course. You're much smarter than everyone else. People are so
stupid.
It was my
> "Here's the *real* checkmate move:" that sent you off into a red-misted frenzy
Remember...you don't get anyone mad. You don't get anyone upset. You
think they do, but they don't. You need to tell yourself that they do,
because that's your motivation. But your autism prevents you from
really telling you how people respond to you.
This is a huge part of your autism, that you put people into "red-
misted frenzies." If there's a single thing that proves you have ASD,
it's this.
> resulting in the horrendous blunder of arguing with yourself
Horrendous? Look around. Does anyone other than you think this?
wherein you didn't
> even recognize something you yourself had written shortly beforehand and your
> arrogant hubristic derangement erupted with you arguing with yourself.
>
> > Sorry, pal...you lose. Again.
>
> No, chumley. You did. Again.
Look around. Does anyone else feel the same way you do?
That should be an important clue to the depth of your autism. The more
alone you are in your thoughts and beliefs, the more profound the ASD.
Boon
> Buffoon blubbered:
>
> > > First this:
> >> > How would I know what behavior therapists think of anything?
> > > Immediately followed by this:
> > > > So far the behavior therapists see no problem with my posting behaviors.
> >> And there you have it, Loony Tune Buffoon talking out of both sides of his
> >> personality disorder.
> > Um, wrong again. Again your ASD has limited your ability to understand written
> > communication.
> > In the first statement, I say that I cannot tell what other human beings are
> > thinking. That's a perfectly legitimate and correct statement.
> > In the second statement, I say that the behavior therapists have no problem
> > with my posting behaviors because they have told me so. Again, it's a
> > perfectly legitimate statement that does not counter the first.
>
> Did you ask them what they *thought* of your *posting behavior*?
No, they told me.
The second
> statement invalidates the first.
No, it doesn't.
>Logic isn't your strong suit, is it?
Yes, it is.
>
> > > Have they come up with a clinical definition for your dementia? I suggest
> > > Solipsistic Personality Disorder.
> > Sorry, pal...you lose again.
>
> Logic would say otherwise, monkeyboy.
Logic says you're autistic. That's what logic says.
'>
> > Usually when you fall apart like this you wind up saying something like "Okay,
> > everyone...I'm taking a break! Back in a few months." That's the sign of your
> > utter defeat. I have to imagine you're very close to that now. I can sense the
> > growing desperation (and sloppy thinking patterns) in your posts. You're
> > making less and less sense, and becoming more and more agitated.
> > Don't do this to yourself. Since you have nothing to contribute to the group,
> > and since you're simply too dumb to participate, just leave.
>
> Now there's the real desperation creeping in.
Desperation again? Yes, we're all so desperate. You simply destroy us.
After you're done with us, we have nothing left to live for.
My, what histrionics! ROTFLMAO!
You are reaching ever deeper into
> that stale old bag of debating trade tricks in an attempt to save your monkey
> face.
Monkey face is a term of endearment. Couple that to the fact yopu keep
calling me Marcy, and I'd say that you are as gay as the day is long.
Not that there's anything wrong with that. You shouldn't get upset
over being gay, you should get upset over being autistic and not
knowing it.
Tell me this...are you surprised by the fact that you're autistic? Is
this all new to you? Or do you know you're autistic and you're just
trying to hide it from us? I can't tell, and neither can the behavior
therapists.
The same old recycled phrases and stock boilerplate you've used
against
> every real and imagined antagonist.
Imagined antagonist? Name one.
GeoSynch
>> > > First this:
>> >> > How would I know what behavior therapists think of anything?
>> > > Immediately followed by this:
>> > > > So far the behavior therapists see no problem with my posting
>> > > > behaviors.
>> >> And there you have it, Loony Tune Buffoon talking out of both sides of his
>> >> personality disorder.
>> > Um, wrong again. Again your ASD has limited your ability to understand
>> > written
>> > communication.
>> > In the first statement, I say that I cannot tell what other human beings
>> > are
>> > thinking. That's a perfectly legitimate and correct statement.
>> > In the second statement, I say that the behavior therapists have no problem
>> > with my posting behaviors because they have told me so. Again, it's a
>> > perfectly legitimate statement that does not counter the first.
> > Did you ask them what they *thought* of your *posting behavior*?
> No, they told me.
Sorry, reeking hypocrite, but that's a brazen lie.
"How would I know what behavior therapists think of anything?" you state. Having
interacted with them, you had to have asked them what they thought of Arny's or
Scott's or my "posting behavior" and if they responded to you, then you would
*know* what they were thinking unless you're too dense to realize that their
response was predicated on what they *thought* before formulating a response.
Furthermore, they supposedly saw "no problem" with your posting behavior without
you having asked them about that specifically beforehand? Yeah, right! So, your
above statement "No, they told me," is a brazen lie as is the initial statement
of "How would I know what behavior therapists think of anything?"
> > The second statement invalidates the first.
> No, it doesn't.
Yes, it does.
> >Logic isn't your strong suit, is it?
> Yes, it is.
Fraid not, old bean.
GeoSynch
>> > You're an idiot.
> > No, imbecile,
> Imbecile? Really, more name calling?
Pot. Kettle. Etc. What a maroon ... not to mention a reeking hypocrite to boot!
> > you made the statement "Really? You don't exist here solely to attack
> > others?" that I'm quoting you as having made. Go back and reread your own
> > post (a few posts prior back) if you must to see that you in fact did make
> > that statement. Your response of "No, I don't. Do you see me attacking
> > Shhh!? Jenn? Clyde? George?" is in response to the question that you
> > yourself posed of "Really? You don't exist here solely to attack others?"
> Chalk it up to your poor writing skills then. I honestly could care less what
> you wrote. Your confused ideas are buried in this sea of
mawkishness, so forgive me if I don't analyze every word.
It's like deja vu all over again. The bumbler is starting to crack under
pressure that he completely lost it and began arguing with himself after my
triumphant declaration of "Here's the *real* checkmate move." But surely as
night follows day, he immediately starts to try and rationalize away and laying
the groundwork for excuses as to why he strenuously began arguing with himself.
>> > > Are you arguing with yourself again, lunatic?
>> > No. You do have an obsession with accusing others of arguing with
>> > themselves.
> > I've just proven it that you are in fact arguing with yourself. Absolutely
> > no doubt about it to anyone other than you, perhaps.
> Actually, you're the only one who believes this.
Fraid not, old bean, as it's glaringly obvious to everybody else you argued with
yourself as I've demo[n]strably proven.
GeoSynch
> > You were caught out arguing with yourself again which is completely
> > different than responding to your own post.
> No, I wasn't arguing with myself. This is a tired old debating trade trick of
> yours. You always pull this out when you have nothing left to say and your
> back is against the wall.
That's a novelty: blaming me for your inability to recognize what you'd
previously written and then proceeding to strenuously argue against that very
statement you previously had made.
>> > It's not something a normal person would do or think.
> > If you mean arguing with yourself, then yes, I agree, that's not something a
> > normal person would do, but an unhinged lunatic on the other hand...
> Blah blah blah, debating trade trick, blah blah blah.
Yep, the bumbler is definitely starting to crack under pressure.
>> > Never has PLF's autism been so obvious. It also shows how desperate he's
>> > become...he's clinging to his last feeble arguments, and they're slipping
>> > away.
> > Reaching ever deeper into that stale bag of debating trade tricks is far
> > more
> > indicative of your increasing desperation.
> "Desperation"? Haven't you complained when I've used that word to describe
> you, reeking hypocrite?
Desperation intensifies as that stale bag of debating trade tricks fails to
deliver the goods.
Boon
> BaBoon howled:
>
>
>
>
>
> >> > > First this:
> >> >> > How would I know what behavior therapists think of anything?
> >> > > Immediately followed by this:
> >> > > > So far the behavior therapists see no problem with my posting
> >> > > > behaviors.
> >> >> And there you have it, Loony Tune Buffoon talking out of both sides of his
> >> >> personality disorder.
> >> > Um, wrong again. Again your ASD has limited your ability to understand
> >> > written
> >> > communication.
> >> > In the first statement, I say that I cannot tell what other human beings
> >> > are
> >> > thinking. That's a perfectly legitimate and correct statement.
> >> > In the second statement, I say that the behavior therapists have no problem
> >> > with my posting behaviors because they have told me so. Again, it's a
> >> > perfectly legitimate statement that does not counter the first.
> > > Did you ask them what they *thought* of your *posting behavior*?
> > No, they told me.
>
> Sorry, reeking hypocrite, but that's a brazen lie.
Prove it.
>
> "How would I know what behavior therapists think of anything?" you state. Having
> interacted with them, you had to have asked them what they thought of Arny's or
> Scott's or my "posting behavior" and if they responded to you, then you would
> *know* what they were thinking unless you're too dense to realize that their
> response was predicated on what they *thought* before formulating a response.
You're assuming that I asked a certain question. I didn't ask that
particular question. Unless you were there (and you weren't), this is
another fantasy construct of yours.
> Furthermore, they supposedly saw "no problem" with your posting behavior without
> you having asked them about that specifically beforehand? Yeah, right! �So, your
> above statement "No, they told me," is a brazen lie as is the initial statement
> of "How would I know what behavior therapists think of anything?"
You make absolutely no sense here. Your entire argument is based upon
what you think we said to one another. That's impossible, of course,
so it becomes obvious that you lied. Again.
>
> > > The second statement invalidates the first.
> > No, it doesn't.
>
> Yes, it does.
>
> > >Logic isn't your strong suit, is it?
> > Yes, it is.
>
> Fraid not, old bean.
Fraid so, autistic boy. Your intellectual inferiority is alwys proven
by your inability to emply given facts to support your case. Instead,
all of your arguments are based upon guesses. Since you suffer from
ASD, all of those guesses are tainted by your skewed view of the world
around you.
You lose. Again.
Boon
>
> >> > You're an idiot.
> > > No, imbecile,
> > Imbecile? Really, more name calling?
>
> Pot. Kettle. Etc. What a maroon ... not to mention a reeking hypocrite to boot!
You answer the charge of name calling by calling me two more names?
ROTFLMAO! God, you're dumb.
>
> > > you made the statement "Really? You don't exist here solely to attack
> > > others?" that I'm quoting you as having made. Go back and reread your own
> > > post (a few posts prior back) if you must to see that you in fact did make
> > > that statement. Your response of "No, I don't. Do you see me attacking
> > > Shhh!? Jenn? Clyde? George?" is in response to the question that you
> > > yourself posed of "Really? You don't exist here solely to attack others?"
> > Chalk it up to your poor writing skills then. I honestly could care less what
> > you wrote. Your confused ideas are buried in this sea of
>
> mawkishness, so forgive me if I don't analyze every word.
>
> It's like deja vu all over again. The bumbler is starting to crack under
> pressure that he completely lost it and began arguing with himself after my
> triumphant declaration of "Here's the *real* checkmate move."
It's like deja vu all over again. Your back is against the wall, so
you trot out that old chesnut about people arguing with themselves.
You do it every time. That's when we all know you've run out of ideas
and that you're grasping at straws.
Normal people don't argue in this way. Autistic people, however, do.
But surely as
> night follows day, he immediately starts to try and rationalize away and laying
> the groundwork for excuses as to why he strenuously began arguing with himself.
There's no rationalizing. You're obsessed with "people arguing with
themselves." It's never been a valid or effective argument, and it
never will be. The only reason you're clinging to this strange idea is
that you've run out of ammo.
>
> >> > > Are you arguing with yourself again, lunatic?
> >> > No. You do have an obsession with accusing others of arguing with
> >> > themselves.
> > > I've just proven it that you are in fact arguing with yourself. Absolutely
> > > no doubt about it to anyone other than you, perhaps.
> > Actually, you're the only one who believes this.
>
> Fraid not, old bean, as it's glaringly obvious to everybody else you argued with
> yourself as I've demo[n]strably proven.
It's only obvious to you, a person with autism. Why isn't anyone else
backing you up on this? It's not a mystery to normal people.
Boon
> Buffoon bumbled:
>
> > > You were caught out arguing with yourself again which is completely
> > > different than responding to your own post.
> > No, I wasn't arguing with myself. This is a tired old debating trade trick of
> > yours. You always pull this out when you have nothing left to say and your
> > back is against the wall.
>
> That's a novelty: blaming me for your inability to recognize what you'd
> previously written and then proceeding to strenuously argue against that very
> statement you previously had made.
Like I said, just ask someone you trust to examine the thread and
support your points. Once you've done that, then you might have a
point.
>
> >> > It's not something a normal person would do or think.
> > > If you mean arguing with yourself, then yes, I agree, that's not something a
> > > normal person would do, but an unhinged lunatic on the other hand...
> > Blah blah blah, debating trade trick, blah blah blah.
>
> Yep, the bumbler is definitely starting to crack under pressure.
Why do you think I'm beginning to crack? Am I starting to accuse you
of arguing with yourself?
ROTFLMAO!
>
> >> > Never has PLF's autism been so obvious. It also shows how desperate he's
> >> > become...he's clinging to his last feeble arguments, and they're slipping
> >> > away.
> > > Reaching ever deeper into that stale bag of debating trade tricks is far
> > > more
> > > indicative of your increasing desperation.
> > "Desperation"? Haven't you complained when I've used that word to describe
> > you, reeking hypocrite?
>
> Desperation intensifies as that stale bag of debating trade tricks fails to
> deliver the goods.
Wow, an obfuscation. I guess you're about ready to take one of your
"breaks," eh? That's always your final move.
GeoSynch
>> > No, I wasn't arguing with myself. This is a tired old debating trade trick
>> > of yours. You always pull this out when you have nothing left to say and
>> > your back is against the wall.
> That's a novelty: blaming me for your inability to recognize what you'd
> previously written and then proceeding to strenuously argue against that very
> statement you previously had made.
> Like I said, just ask someone you trust to examine the thread and support your
> points. Once you've done that, then you might have a point.
Non-responsiveness confirms it. You were arguing with yourself and you know it,
but just can't bring yourself to admitting the obvious.
>> >> > It's not something a normal person would do or think.
>> > > If you mean arguing with yourself, then yes, I agree, that's not
>> > > something a normal person would do, but an unhinged lunatic on the other
>> > > hand...
>> > Blah blah blah, debating trade trick, blah blah blah.
> > Yep, the bumbler is definitely starting to crack under pressure.
> Why do you think I'm beginning to crack? Am I starting to accuse you of
> arguing with yourself?
"Blah blah blah, debating trade trick, blah blah blah."
> ROTFLMAO!
Indeed.
>> >> > Never has PLF's autism been so obvious. It also shows how desperate he's
>> >> > become...he's clinging to his last feeble arguments, and they're
>> >> > slipping away.
>> > > Reaching ever deeper into that stale bag of debating trade tricks is far
>> > > more indicative of your increasing desperation.
>> > "Desperation"? Haven't you complained when I've used that word to describe
>> > you, reeking hypocrite?
> > Desperation intensifies as that stale bag of debating trade tricks fails to
> > deliver the goods.
> Wow, an obfuscation. I guess you're about ready to take one of your "breaks,"
> eh? That's always your final move.
Is that what you're desperately hoping will happen? Don't bet your treehouse on
it, monkeyboy.