Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 92
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted
sorry that i don't say what you, or the rest of the clique, want to here.

 

yeah dude, that's the reason that people blast your posts, because we're all like-minded sheep.

 

it couldn't possibly have anything to do with the fact that you're constantly negative, you criticize respected members of the media to whom most of TSW are thrilled to have access, you add aboslutely nothing of substance to any discussion, etc.

Posted
sorry that i don't say what you, or the rest of the clique, want to here.

It's not that. You can say what you want. It's the arrogant, condescending way you say it.

Posted
yeah dude, that's the reason that people blast your posts, because we're all like-minded sheep.

 

it couldn't possibly have anything to do with the fact that you're constantly negative, you criticize respected members of the media to whom most of TSW are thrilled to have access, you add aboslutely nothing of substance to any discussion, etc.

 

 

 

just a differing opinion about some things. if you don't like it, tough sh--.

Posted
i could make up a name... say like.... Darcy Regier and say that i run the Sabres. he could be a fraud for all we know.

 

Pleaze stop. I haven't seen someone make a fool of himself like this since Sue, or that retatta guy.

Posted
just a differing opinion about some things. if you don't like it, tough sh--.

 

so that's what you call questioning the authenticity of a credentialed media members' handle? a differing opinion?

 

let's review, for a moment, how the discussion got to this level:

 

- you questioned john's associations and his qualifications for making a statement about mr. wilson

- several posters attempted to put a stop to your line of questioning in order to keep you from embarrassing yourself

- you reacted by lashing out at those that advised you of john's professional affiliations

- you chalked it all up to "differing opinions"

 

yeah, it's definitely us, not you.

Posted
so that's what you call questioning the authenticity of a credentialed media members' handle? a differing opinion?

 

let's review, for a moment, how the discussion got to this level:

 

- you questioned john's associations and his qualifications for making a statement about mr. wilson

- several posters attempted to put a stop to your line of questioning in order to keep you from embarrassing yourself

- you reacted by lashing out at those that advised you of john's professional affiliations

- you chalked it all up to "differing opinions"

 

yeah, it's definitely us, not you.

 

 

i didn't criticize or lash out at anybody. the members of your clique are doing that.

Posted
i didn't criticize or lash out at anybody. the members of your clique are doing that.

 

first off, there's no "clique" just because the majority of posters in this thread are against you.

 

secondly:

 

http://www.stadiumwall.com/index.php?s=&am...t&p=1466335

http://www.stadiumwall.com/index.php?s=&am...t&p=1466372

http://www.stadiumwall.com/index.php?s=&am...t&p=1466384

http://www.stadiumwall.com/index.php?s=&am...t&p=1466393

http://www.stadiumwall.com/index.php?s=&am...t&p=1466396

 

so explain to me how questioning someone's credentials and calling them a "fraud" isn't lashing out or criticizing?

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...