The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
So who do you want to be the next Pope?
I just wanted to use the title. Bet it's been done a thousand times before anyway
I just wanted to use the title. Bet it's been done a thousand times before anyway
Page:
Light wrote:
> Celestine wrote:
> Light wrote:
> So you retract what you said about getting people to lay off you?
>
> No. Why must you insist on pestering me? Are you trying to make me
> an example of something? That you're the greater of wits? Please,
> have the floor then. I don't understand what I did initially to
> generate such contempt from you. Regardless of my position on any
> matter, your dire attempts to condemn me are hurtful.
>
> And yet, you're happy to condemn others? Sorry sweetheart, but if
> you're gonna dish it out, learn to take it.
Jesus, Mary, and Joseph..what are you blabbing about now, you. I didn't start this you remember? You lashed out at me. I went to your Christian Warriors (whatever) thread and had my fun and now you're all pissy because I called your rant crap. I didn't condemn anyone for anything, I just riled them up referring to them as a congregation of bobble-heads. It was for fun. You know, haha? I subsequently mentioned that I share the some of the same views as you, but you just want to argue.
You apologised to me. Do you not recall? I accepted your apology. Were you not sincere? I have to ask, because you keep wanting me to "take it" from you. I'll keep dishing it back if you want to keep dancing in circles and trying to make me out to be something I'm not.
I don't think I'm better than anyone because I'm Catholic. I'm not perfect and I don't think I know it all. But, if you insist on categorising me as such, so be it. I can't control what you think, only defend my position.
>
> I pester you for the same reason as I pester everyone; so I
> can see how they reached the conclusions they did, and thus to find
> out if their opinion is really theirs, or if it's just repeating
> something. Don't think you're special to me; I'm afraid I do this to
> whomever I debate with. Mostly, people are happy to oblige.
>
> And you generated contempt initially because I disagreed with your
> views, and you avoided justifying them. Having an opinion doesn't
> excuse you from having to explain it.
Bleh. I know I'm not special to you. I don't want to be either. Ew! You're seeming to me like the lion in the Wizard of Oz now. "Come ooonn, puttum aaappp..." Puhlease. I'll give it to you when I'm damn ready.
>
> Even with Freedom of Expression, as I also understand and of course
> allow Mr. Thraves..there must be some associated tact. I found it
> tactless and disappointing and scathing the low moral ground to be
> spinning plates and doing cartwheels in this very time. Just my
> opinion, of course. I'll always view him on a higher pinnacle and
> encourage him to strive for more.
>
> Tactless? Yup, I was. But then, you're not my girlfriend and I don't
> owe you any favours. The world is full of tactless people. Are you
> going to lose your temper with every one of them?
*looks around* Who's angry? You seem angrier than anyone I've encountered here on these forums. What gives? Is it because I'm not standing down? Is it because I'm a woman? Is it because I'm Catholic? Please do disclose. What is it that makes you so distressed with me, love?
> The only thing I told you to please stop was your continuous
> antagonistic pestering. It's juvenile.
>
> So asking you questions is antagonistic? I'll admit to being OTT
> initially, but since then I've just asked you for clarification.
> Where's the problem with that?
It's not the questions, I don't mind proper inquiries...just your demeanor.
> Pending answers to the above, I'd be happy to.
>
> Thank you.
>
> Uhh...I have more questions based on your answers. That happens a lot
> with me...
I must be that arousing?
> Celestine wrote:
> Light wrote:
> So you retract what you said about getting people to lay off you?
>
> No. Why must you insist on pestering me? Are you trying to make me
> an example of something? That you're the greater of wits? Please,
> have the floor then. I don't understand what I did initially to
> generate such contempt from you. Regardless of my position on any
> matter, your dire attempts to condemn me are hurtful.
>
> And yet, you're happy to condemn others? Sorry sweetheart, but if
> you're gonna dish it out, learn to take it.
Jesus, Mary, and Joseph..what are you blabbing about now, you. I didn't start this you remember? You lashed out at me. I went to your Christian Warriors (whatever) thread and had my fun and now you're all pissy because I called your rant crap. I didn't condemn anyone for anything, I just riled them up referring to them as a congregation of bobble-heads. It was for fun. You know, haha? I subsequently mentioned that I share the some of the same views as you, but you just want to argue.
You apologised to me. Do you not recall? I accepted your apology. Were you not sincere? I have to ask, because you keep wanting me to "take it" from you. I'll keep dishing it back if you want to keep dancing in circles and trying to make me out to be something I'm not.
I don't think I'm better than anyone because I'm Catholic. I'm not perfect and I don't think I know it all. But, if you insist on categorising me as such, so be it. I can't control what you think, only defend my position.
>
> I pester you for the same reason as I pester everyone; so I
> can see how they reached the conclusions they did, and thus to find
> out if their opinion is really theirs, or if it's just repeating
> something. Don't think you're special to me; I'm afraid I do this to
> whomever I debate with. Mostly, people are happy to oblige.
>
> And you generated contempt initially because I disagreed with your
> views, and you avoided justifying them. Having an opinion doesn't
> excuse you from having to explain it.
Bleh. I know I'm not special to you. I don't want to be either. Ew! You're seeming to me like the lion in the Wizard of Oz now. "Come ooonn, puttum aaappp..." Puhlease. I'll give it to you when I'm damn ready.
>
> Even with Freedom of Expression, as I also understand and of course
> allow Mr. Thraves..there must be some associated tact. I found it
> tactless and disappointing and scathing the low moral ground to be
> spinning plates and doing cartwheels in this very time. Just my
> opinion, of course. I'll always view him on a higher pinnacle and
> encourage him to strive for more.
>
> Tactless? Yup, I was. But then, you're not my girlfriend and I don't
> owe you any favours. The world is full of tactless people. Are you
> going to lose your temper with every one of them?
*looks around* Who's angry? You seem angrier than anyone I've encountered here on these forums. What gives? Is it because I'm not standing down? Is it because I'm a woman? Is it because I'm Catholic? Please do disclose. What is it that makes you so distressed with me, love?
> The only thing I told you to please stop was your continuous
> antagonistic pestering. It's juvenile.
>
> So asking you questions is antagonistic? I'll admit to being OTT
> initially, but since then I've just asked you for clarification.
> Where's the problem with that?
It's not the questions, I don't mind proper inquiries...just your demeanor.
> Pending answers to the above, I'd be happy to.
>
> Thank you.
>
> Uhh...I have more questions based on your answers. That happens a lot
> with me...
I must be that arousing?
It's pretty clear who wears the trousers in their relationship
English_Bloke wrote:
> And so he can be the bigger boy of the forum ;)
>
> I mean, just look at the way he picks on poor little Kevstar.
>
> You bully, Light. You bully.
Heh. Well, yeah; i do it for fun when it's kevstar. Or Forest Fan. Or Belldandy.
But when it's Skarra, there's genuine interest in debate. Same goes for anyone else.
No, really.
> And so he can be the bigger boy of the forum ;)
>
> I mean, just look at the way he picks on poor little Kevstar.
>
> You bully, Light. You bully.
Heh. Well, yeah; i do it for fun when it's kevstar. Or Forest Fan. Or Belldandy.
But when it's Skarra, there's genuine interest in debate. Same goes for anyone else.
No, really.
Light wrote:
> I pester you for the same reason as I pester everyone; so I can see how they reached the conclusions they did
And so he can be the bigger boy of the forum ;)
I mean, just look at the way he picks on poor little Kevstar.
You bully, Light. You bully.
> I pester you for the same reason as I pester everyone; so I can see how they reached the conclusions they did
And so he can be the bigger boy of the forum ;)
I mean, just look at the way he picks on poor little Kevstar.
You bully, Light. You bully.
Celestine wrote:
> Light wrote:
> So you retract what you said about getting people to lay off you?
>
> No. Why must you insist on pestering me? Are you trying to make me
> an example of something? That you're the greater of wits? Please,
> have the floor then. I don't understand what I did initially to
> generate such contempt from you. Regardless of my position on any
> matter, your dire attempts to condemn me are hurtful.
And yet, you're happy to condemn others? Sorry sweetheart, but if you're gonna dish it out, learn to take it.
I pester you for the same reason as I pester everyone; so I can see how they reached the conclusions they did, and thus to find out if their opinion is really theirs, or if it's just repeating something. Don't think you're special to me; I'm afraid I do this to whomever I debate with. Mostly, people are happy to oblige.
And you generated contempt initially because I disagreed with your views, and you avoided justifying them. Having an opinion doesn't excuse you from having to explain it.
>
> Even with Freedom of Expression, as I also understand and of course
> allow Mr. Thraves..there must be some associated tact. I found it
> tactless and disappointing and scathing the low moral ground to be
> spinning plates and doing cartwheels in this very time. Just my
> opinion, of course. I'll always view him on a higher pinnacle and
> encourage him to strive for more.
Tactless? Yup, I was. But then, you're not my girlfriend and I don't owe you any favours. The world is full of tactless people. Are you going to lose your temper with every one of them?
> The only thing I told you to please stop was your continuous
> antagonistic pestering. It's juvenile.
So asking you questions is antagonistic? I'll admit to being OTT initially, but since then I've just asked you for clarification. Where's the problem with that?
> Pending answers to the above, I'd be happy to.
>
> Thank you.
Uhh...I have more questions based on your answers. That happens a lot with me...
> Light wrote:
> So you retract what you said about getting people to lay off you?
>
> No. Why must you insist on pestering me? Are you trying to make me
> an example of something? That you're the greater of wits? Please,
> have the floor then. I don't understand what I did initially to
> generate such contempt from you. Regardless of my position on any
> matter, your dire attempts to condemn me are hurtful.
And yet, you're happy to condemn others? Sorry sweetheart, but if you're gonna dish it out, learn to take it.
I pester you for the same reason as I pester everyone; so I can see how they reached the conclusions they did, and thus to find out if their opinion is really theirs, or if it's just repeating something. Don't think you're special to me; I'm afraid I do this to whomever I debate with. Mostly, people are happy to oblige.
And you generated contempt initially because I disagreed with your views, and you avoided justifying them. Having an opinion doesn't excuse you from having to explain it.
>
> Even with Freedom of Expression, as I also understand and of course
> allow Mr. Thraves..there must be some associated tact. I found it
> tactless and disappointing and scathing the low moral ground to be
> spinning plates and doing cartwheels in this very time. Just my
> opinion, of course. I'll always view him on a higher pinnacle and
> encourage him to strive for more.
Tactless? Yup, I was. But then, you're not my girlfriend and I don't owe you any favours. The world is full of tactless people. Are you going to lose your temper with every one of them?
> The only thing I told you to please stop was your continuous
> antagonistic pestering. It's juvenile.
So asking you questions is antagonistic? I'll admit to being OTT initially, but since then I've just asked you for clarification. Where's the problem with that?
> Pending answers to the above, I'd be happy to.
>
> Thank you.
Uhh...I have more questions based on your answers. That happens a lot with me...
Of course we've said Blessed. You'd better have watched Flash Gordon the other day, FFF. It gets better every time.
Dive.
Dive.
Anyone said Brian Blessed yet?
They better have, for the sake of all that is good and fat and loud and holy.
Although, for the record, I don't care, and was considering mailing the BBC about the ridiculous amount of air time spent on such bullsh. But, as usual, I CBA.
They better have, for the sake of all that is good and fat and loud and holy.
Although, for the record, I don't care, and was considering mailing the BBC about the ridiculous amount of air time spent on such bullsh. But, as usual, I CBA.
J Nash wrote:
> Celestine wrote:
> Mm..hello boys.
>
> [URL]http://img25.exs.cx/img25/3438/808ji.jpg[/URL]
That's funny.
> Celestine wrote:
> Mm..hello boys.
>
> [URL]http://img25.exs.cx/img25/3438/808ji.jpg[/URL]
That's funny.
Light wrote:
> So you retract what you said about getting people to lay off you?
No. Why must you insist on pestering me? Are you trying to make me an example of something? That you're the greater of wits? Please, have the floor then. I don't understand what I did initially to generate such contempt from you. Regardless of my position on any matter, your dire attempts to condemn me are hurtful.
> For the record, Mrs Light is fine about my ridicule of both the
> office of the papacy, and the former pope himself. She understands
> something called Freedom of Expression.
Even with Freedom of Expression, as I also understand and of course allow Mr. Thraves..there must be some associated tact. I found it tactless and disappointing and scathing the low moral ground to be spinning plates and doing cartwheels in this very time. Just my opinion, of course. I'll always view him on a higher pinnacle and encourage him to strive for more.
> For my part, I have the
> courtesy not to share my more extreme views about catholicism with
> her. You don't have that option on a public web forum. If you don't
> like the views expressed, by all means say so. Telling people to
> stop...that's different.
The only thing I told you to please stop was your continuous antagonistic pestering. It's juvenile.
> I was going to say that I'm his girlfriend and all, but then that
> would be implying I have some kind of control over the man in that
> capacity. No. He has a mind of his own. A beautiful one at that.
> I honestly don't believe he'd restrict me from registering my
> opinion
> about anything. I can, however, appreciate and respect his views
> when I mis-step. It goes both ways.
>
> Really? I hadn't realised that. And what you say makes perfect sense,
> though your actions on this board don't match what you say there.
I don't really understand what you're trying to say, but do know that if Mr. Thraves interjected, I would listen to him. But, he hasn't.
> [edit] Now, now will you please, dear Sir Light, stop.
>
> Pending answers to the above, I'd be happy to.
Thank you.
> So you retract what you said about getting people to lay off you?
No. Why must you insist on pestering me? Are you trying to make me an example of something? That you're the greater of wits? Please, have the floor then. I don't understand what I did initially to generate such contempt from you. Regardless of my position on any matter, your dire attempts to condemn me are hurtful.
> For the record, Mrs Light is fine about my ridicule of both the
> office of the papacy, and the former pope himself. She understands
> something called Freedom of Expression.
Even with Freedom of Expression, as I also understand and of course allow Mr. Thraves..there must be some associated tact. I found it tactless and disappointing and scathing the low moral ground to be spinning plates and doing cartwheels in this very time. Just my opinion, of course. I'll always view him on a higher pinnacle and encourage him to strive for more.
> For my part, I have the
> courtesy not to share my more extreme views about catholicism with
> her. You don't have that option on a public web forum. If you don't
> like the views expressed, by all means say so. Telling people to
> stop...that's different.
The only thing I told you to please stop was your continuous antagonistic pestering. It's juvenile.
> I was going to say that I'm his girlfriend and all, but then that
> would be implying I have some kind of control over the man in that
> capacity. No. He has a mind of his own. A beautiful one at that.
> I honestly don't believe he'd restrict me from registering my
> opinion
> about anything. I can, however, appreciate and respect his views
> when I mis-step. It goes both ways.
>
> Really? I hadn't realised that. And what you say makes perfect sense,
> though your actions on this board don't match what you say there.
I don't really understand what you're trying to say, but do know that if Mr. Thraves interjected, I would listen to him. But, he hasn't.
> [edit] Now, now will you please, dear Sir Light, stop.
>
> Pending answers to the above, I'd be happy to.
Thank you.
Celestine wrote:
> Mm..hello boys.
[URL]http://img25.exs.cx/img25/3438/808ji.jpg[/URL]
> Mm..hello boys.
[URL]http://img25.exs.cx/img25/3438/808ji.jpg[/URL]
Page: