Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

 

No it wouldn't, because people just ignore your polemical rants. How do you not even begin to understand that?

Yes, it would. "People" is not everyone, and you don't speak for the board(again, who is the narcissist?). And, if you'll notice...with Justice and the whole terrorist threads...yeah, he reads all of that. Ask yourself why. IF things were as you say, he wouldn't....but he does.

 

You know a lot, but with human behavior and its psychology, you might as well be a child.

Edited by OCinBuffalo
Posted (edited)

Yes, it would. "People" is not everyone, and you don't speak for the board(again, who is the narcissist?). And, if you'll notice...with Justice and the whole terrorist threads...yeah, he reads all of that. Ask yourself why. IF things were as you say, he wouldn't....but he does.

 

You know a lot, but with human behavior and its psychology, you might as well be a child.

 

I don't speak for the board. I observe the board. And generally, people don't bother with you. Using Justice as an example is fallacious, given that people have openly questioned his sanity for reading your posts.

Edited by DC Tom
Posted

 

I don't speak for the board. I observe the board. And generally, people don't bother with you. Using Justice as an example is fallacious, given that people have openly questioned his sanity for reading your posts.

Ah, so because you don't agree with him reading my posts(the better phrase is "don't understand why he reads my posts")...that makes him insane?

 

Come now. You and the other "people" have spent pages talking with justice. I highly doubt you'd do that if you actually thought he was insane.

 

It's as I said: you're out of your depth here Tom. Why he reads my long posts(intentionally long, you moron) is a question you are incapable of answering. Period. I don't care if that bothers you. I tell the truth, tough schit if you don't like it. Now, I imagine one of these threads could use another reference to the Abbaside Caliphate...so why don't you run along and post something you know about?

Posted

Ah, so because you don't agree with him reading my posts(the better phrase is "don't understand why he reads my posts")...that makes him insane?

 

Come now. You and the other "people" have spent pages talking with justice. I highly doubt you'd do that if you actually thought he was insane.

 

It's as I said: you're out of your depth here Tom. Why he reads my long posts(intentionally long, you moron) is a question you are incapable of answering. Period. I don't care if that bothers you. I tell the truth, tough schit if you don't like it. Now, I imagine one of these threads could use another reference to the Abbaside Caliphate...so why don't you run along and post something you know about?

 

The long ones? Hell no. I was trying to make a poll here to see who reads your screeds but couldn't figure out how to do it. Anyone care to post the poll?

Posted

 

The long ones? Hell no. I was trying to make a poll here to see who reads your screeds but couldn't figure out how to do it. Anyone care to post the poll?

 

I would, but I'm not interested enough to give OC that much validation.

Posted

 

I would, but I'm not interested enough to give OC that much validation.

I think it's safe to say that the poll would do anything but validate him.

Posted

. . . Posters come here BECAUSE we call each other retarded, short bus riders. And don't fool yourself: there's a buttload of lurkers who come here just to watch. You are in the pits: of either glory, or despair. If I can rattle you with a mere "short bus" reference? :lol: I don't need my axe, all I need is my thumb. . . .

 

 

Yes, it would. "People" is not everyone, and you don't speak for the board(again, who is the narcissist?). . . .

 

When you think silent lurkers come to the board to be entertained by your self-proclaimed mastery of others, the answer is pretty clear.

Posted

http://www.wired.com/2015/04/house-passes-cybersecurity-bill-despite-privacy-protests/?mbid=synd_slate

 

 

 

“I’m very disappointed that the house has passed an information sharing bill that does so much to threaten Americans’ privacy and civil liberties, and no real effort was made to address the problems the bill still had,” says Greene. “The rules committee has excluded amendments that would have resolved privacy concerns…This is little more than a backdoor for general purpose surveillance.”

 

In a surprise move yesterday, the White House also publicly backed PCNA and its Senate counterpart, the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act in a statement to press. That’s a reversal of its threat to veto a similar Cybersecurity Information Sharing and Protection Actin 2013 over privacy concerns, a decision that all but killed the earlier attempt at cybersecurity data sharing legislation. Since then, however, a string of high-profile breaches seems to have swayed President Obama’s thinking . . .

Posted

 

OK somewhat tangential anecdote: Today I decided to check my Facebook page. On the "people you may know" list, there was a person (the redhead in San Diego) that Facebook shouldn't have known that I know. How the actual !@#$ they figured that out is beyond me. But creepy.

 

FWIW:

 

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2083800/facebook-faces-lawsuit-for-allegedly-scanning-private-messages.html

Posted

Ah, so because you don't agree with him reading my posts(the better phrase is "don't understand why he reads my posts")...that makes him insane?

 

Come now. You and the other "people" have spent pages talking with justice. I highly doubt you'd do that if you actually thought he was insane.

 

It's as I said: you're out of your depth here Tom. Why he reads my long posts(intentionally long, you moron) is a question you are incapable of answering. Period. I don't care if that bothers you. I tell the truth, tough schit if you don't like it. Now, I imagine one of these threads could use another reference to the Abbaside Caliphate...so why don't you run along and post something you know about?

What about gatorturd then?

Posted (edited)

 

 

 

When you think silent lurkers come to the board to be entertained by your self-proclaimed mastery of others, the answer is pretty clear.

Yeah, yeah...and you don't read my PMs, clown. I don't think anything. I know, because I've gotten plenty of lurker mail over the years. The only problem is, I don't post PMs unless somebody else posts mine. So, no, I'm not going to share them with you. Besides, most of it is stupid cheerleading for me to go after DC_Tom anyway.

 

And PPP is not me, and it never will be. I specifically referred to PPP, not myself. I also specifically said "we" and "we" is on display in your own bolded above, nitwit. :blink: Thanks for saving me the trouble.

 

Sorry, not only don't you have the answer, you don't even know the question.

 

OCinBuffalo, on 21 Apr 2015 - 3:16 PM, said:snapback.png

 

It's nice to see that Bills' TE MarQueis Gray has a much better attitude about people that ride the "short bus" than you do.

 

http://boards.buffal...ity-Involvement

 

Like I care....here.

 

Strike 2 on "This is PPP, you unmitigated moron".

Edited by OCinBuffalo
Posted (edited)

What about gatorturd then?

What about him?

 

Other than "fills a need for DC_Tom, just like conner, blzurl, and Molson_Golden before him" I don't see why he's relevant to what I am saying above.

 

There's a difference between stupid and insane. Stupidity is a choice. Insane, not so much.

 

For example: reddogblitz can choose to not conceive of PPP properly, which would be stupid, or, he can choose to get his act together and come back at me with something other that "microaggression/trigger/safe place" PC horseshit. :lol: Who knows, that might even be funny. But, it's not like reddogblitz is ignorant, I have told him that "this is PPP" 2 times now.

 

gatorman is stupid, largely because he continues to post here in almost every thread, when we all know going in that there's a 5% chance he knows the material being discussed.

 

gatorman supports Keynesian economics, but he can't tell you what that is, and probably never even heard the term before he got here. Thus, he's not insane, nor is he entirely stupid: he gets a free education here, from albeit harsh schoolmasters that beat him regularly, but still....he does always end up with some pudding, and he rarely eats his meat.

Edited by OCinBuffalo
Posted

 

 

"The Assembly added that the “harsh treatment” of whistleblower Edward Snowden - who testified to the Assembly for this report by live video-link from Moscow - by the US authorities did not contribute to restoring mutual trust and public confidence."

 

Harsh treatment? Didn't he steal a bunch of secret information? He's a criminal, isn't he?

 

But can you define "Facebook?" [/crocotard]

Oh, I'm the one asking the question, am I. How Orwellian of you.

Posted

"The Assembly added that the “harsh treatment” of whistleblower Edward Snowden - who testified to the Assembly for this report by live video-link from Moscow - by the US authorities did not contribute to restoring mutual trust and public confidence."

 

Harsh treatment? Didn't he steal a bunch of secret information? He's a criminal, isn't he?

 

 

Oh, I'm the one asking the question, am I. How Orwellian of you.

 

So are you ok with our government being judge, jury and executioner of it's own people?

Posted

 

So are you ok with our government being judge, jury and executioner of it's own people?

Holy twisting what I said batman. Is anyone denying him of due process?

×
×
  • Create New...