Rosa
- Thread starter John Connellan
- Start date
None can beat my posting prowess for long.
well done on 3000 posts (if you/i/anyone cares)
noone can beat me at posting things.
oh yes
.
ok, most people here have more, but not for long....
noone can beat me at posting things.
oh yes
.
ok, most people here have more, but not for long....
John Connellan said:
And guess who feels those blows the most?
[Hint: He who keeps on following me.]
John Connellan said:
Just you wait till she sees this! Oh my.
John Connellan said:
Oh, poor you. So this is what you are afraid of? That I wouldn't like you?
John Connellan said:U would go for a real man........like Spurious
And now you're trying to make me feel guilty, jealous, blind *and* stupid?
These are such CHEAP tricks that I am too bored to poke at you properly.
What is it with you?
Are you lonely? Afraid? Needy? Yes?!
Bah.
statement A: is it possible to follow someone on a forum? "oh look officer, this fourm person keeps appearing in my threads?!" please do something. "what?? its a forum, he can come whereever he wants, and perhaps starting a thread about this is somewhat suspicious, perhaps he just finds your threads...stimulating?" hmmm., (sorry, radiohead always makes me spell funny EDIT: wrong)
statement B: i suppose shell react the way she does to everything else *waits* *yawns* *waits*
statement C: yerwot? sorry for that burst of colloquiallism, but i doubt there are many people here who know anyone particulaly well... y'know. talking about liking people is hard on a forum. so 'shut it sista' *snaps fingers (why am i writing this?)
statement D: cheap tricks to the purpose of......??
and whats wrong with spurious. hes groovy.
lonely? afraid? needy?
pah.
statement B: i suppose shell react the way she does to everything else *waits* *yawns* *waits*
statement C: yerwot? sorry for that burst of colloquiallism, but i doubt there are many people here who know anyone particulaly well... y'know. talking about liking people is hard on a forum. so 'shut it sista' *snaps fingers (why am i writing this?)
statement D: cheap tricks to the purpose of......??
and whats wrong with spurious. hes groovy.
lonely? afraid? needy?
pah.
John Connellan said:
I can't reveal this information. I'm afraid everybody will start using this test and then all good women will be taken in no time.
I'm going to be selfish in this matter.
John Connellan
Valued Senior Member
Now I'm going to take apart your thread and do a psychological profile of u. This will be very objective and will not contain any reaction from myself.
U think that from my question, that I somehow don't like u being aggressive and that I want the old Rosa back.
U see Gendanken as a strong person who would not put up with what I said. U see her as a person to strive to be. U are trying to act a bit more like Gendanken these days becauase u would like to have a stronger character.
U think that I said "but u dont like me" in the hope that u would say that u actually do like me. U think that I am looking for reassurance that u do like me. U think I am afraid that u don't like me (fairly obvious as u said that!)
U think that I am bringing in Spurious to this discussion to divert the attention away from myself.
U are reading too much into everything I say. U think that there's a hidden message in everything I say.
U don't really think I am any of the above but u are trying to be a bit more aggressive in your posts perhaps so that Gendanken will respect u more.
RosaMagika said:
U think that from my question, that I somehow don't like u being aggressive and that I want the old Rosa back.
U see Gendanken as a strong person who would not put up with what I said. U see her as a person to strive to be. U are trying to act a bit more like Gendanken these days becauase u would like to have a stronger character.
U think that I said "but u dont like me" in the hope that u would say that u actually do like me. U think that I am looking for reassurance that u do like me. U think I am afraid that u don't like me (fairly obvious as u said that!)
U think that I am bringing in Spurious to this discussion to divert the attention away from myself.
U are reading too much into everything I say. U think that there's a hidden message in everything I say.
U don't really think I am any of the above but u are trying to be a bit more aggressive in your posts perhaps so that Gendanken will respect u more.
John Connellan said:
I find that very attentive because I am an attention seeker.
John,
Either
a) You think you have special access to a wormhole that leads from Ireland straight into my mind, so that you can make objective conjectures about what I think.
b) You indeed are as charming as Rain Man.
c) You just want everyone here to see what you think, and what is more, you want everyone here to see what I and some other members would think of you.
d) Any combination of the above.
Nope, it won't contain any reaction from yourself, as the fact that you have posted that post is a reaction of yourself.
Well, yes. To stick to objectivity, objective reality, multiple universes, quantum theory, the theory of processing goat cheese, good argumentation strategies, successful problem solving strategies, and eating soup with Chinese sticks, yes, one could objectively say, with evidence that compells one to puke, that I think that you would rather have the "old Rosa" back.
Begorrah! Since, objectively according to you, I would like to have a stronger character, you are implying that I have a weaker one now. Well, I think that most people strive to have a stronger character, so I am no exception.
Indeed, Gendy would most likely not put up with what you said: but it's not like I can stop you.
By acting the way you do, you are showing how little respect you actually have for me (and it is getting worse and worse). You wish to make your respect for me to depend on how I handle your low blows -- which is a low blow itself.
It is sad, the methods you are resorting to to get someone's attention. And, to make it even sadder, everyone here can read it.
If this thread is not about you looking for reassurance of my liking for you, then it is about you making fun of yourself, and trying to make fun of me and others participating here.
Which is pathetic.
No. I think that you are bringing in Spurious because you are, by comparison, trying to divert attention back to yourself. You also think it is safe to bring him in -- he rarely makes any troubles.
No offense, Monkey.
No, not a *hidden* message: a clearly readable one; it is just that you are illiterate of your own language.
And you bring in Gendanken because she's a fetish of yours? Maybe even, you have changed "priorities", gave up on me, and began to fancy Gendy -- and you felt guilty of neglecting me -- hence this thread.
Ah, John.
Either
a) You think you have special access to a wormhole that leads from Ireland straight into my mind, so that you can make objective conjectures about what I think.
b) You indeed are as charming as Rain Man.
c) You just want everyone here to see what you think, and what is more, you want everyone here to see what I and some other members would think of you.
d) Any combination of the above.
John Connellan said:
Nope, it won't contain any reaction from yourself, as the fact that you have posted that post is a reaction of yourself.
John Connellan said:
Well, yes. To stick to objectivity, objective reality, multiple universes, quantum theory, the theory of processing goat cheese, good argumentation strategies, successful problem solving strategies, and eating soup with Chinese sticks, yes, one could objectively say, with evidence that compells one to puke, that I think that you would rather have the "old Rosa" back.
John Connellan said:
Begorrah! Since, objectively according to you, I would like to have a stronger character, you are implying that I have a weaker one now. Well, I think that most people strive to have a stronger character, so I am no exception.
Indeed, Gendy would most likely not put up with what you said: but it's not like I can stop you.
By acting the way you do, you are showing how little respect you actually have for me (and it is getting worse and worse). You wish to make your respect for me to depend on how I handle your low blows -- which is a low blow itself.
It is sad, the methods you are resorting to to get someone's attention. And, to make it even sadder, everyone here can read it.
John Connellan said:
If this thread is not about you looking for reassurance of my liking for you, then it is about you making fun of yourself, and trying to make fun of me and others participating here.
Which is pathetic.
John Connellan said:
No. I think that you are bringing in Spurious because you are, by comparison, trying to divert attention back to yourself. You also think it is safe to bring him in -- he rarely makes any troubles.
No offense, Monkey.
John Connellan said:
No, not a *hidden* message: a clearly readable one; it is just that you are illiterate of your own language.
John Connellan said:
And you bring in Gendanken because she's a fetish of yours? Maybe even, you have changed "priorities", gave up on me, and began to fancy Gendy -- and you felt guilty of neglecting me -- hence this thread.
Ah, John.
*yawns*
This is getting a bit ridiculous, you are sure that you want to discuss and analyze each others personalities over the internet? Without ever having met each other in the real world?
Somehow this thread looks sad to me.
Somehow this thread looks sad to me.
thats why i went *yawn*. did ya see wha i da tha?
^^ kunax you rule
If I read correctly...and I like to think that I did...then whats sad is that it was a light hearted joke and the intended audience didn't get it so they went furtheron to call the publisher of the thread sad.
Whats sad is that what was light hearted humor has turned into another debate because philosophy has taught us to be stoic statues of thoughts, not human beings.
....its ironic because so many of us here feel the stupidity of the masses haunts us and holds us back but time and time again we let ourselves be caught pants down in the rain while we were too busy hating the "fools".
Whats sad is that what was light hearted humor has turned into another debate because philosophy has taught us to be stoic statues of thoughts, not human beings.
....its ironic because so many of us here feel the stupidity of the masses haunts us and holds us back but time and time again we let ourselves be caught pants down in the rain while we were too busy hating the "fools".
John... sez,
To which i respond: Hardly. I'd bet Rosa feels somewhat flattered by the attention Gendy paid her, if not tickled pink.
referring to the lifeline Gendy threw out for Rosa... in this thread.
To which i respond: Hardly. I'd bet Rosa feels somewhat flattered by the attention Gendy paid her, if not tickled pink.
RosaMagika said:No offense, Monkey.
None taken...thought about saying something really offensive to contradict you but then remembered that I am such a nice person...and a sexy beast!
seriusly rosa, that was highly like danke, but i dont care since it could just be co-incidence
bye.
bye.