not logged in
| re: Bright Eyes would make a great lawyer | |
Posted by:  |
stewbeef 06:57 pm UTC 10/21/07 |
| In reply to: | Bright Eyes would make a great lawyer - Mr.Egg 03:08 pm UTC 10/21/07 |
| can,t you even post your own origanal thread mr egg(i,m a poet and i didnt know it)to get your point across why did you have to re post bright eyes thread, why not just say read bright eyes thread from when ever. > I am convinced that Bright Eyes would make a wonderful > lawyer. > > Is it possible that some people who attack her are jealous > of her ability to argue a point with such intellectual > skill? > > Bright Eyes wrote to Leesa: > > "I notice you only post about your fanatical hatred of > Susan, and your paranoia that others are actually Susan. > You seem to have nothing else you want to post about. If > you were trying to get Susan off the board so you could > use the board without her...that would be one thing. > Mr.Egg, on the other hand, is one of the only recent > posters on this board who has wanted to discuss a Steinman > project or his work. I have no idea why some here care so > much about whether posts about the Bat musical are in one > thread or not. It's not like there's a lot of other Jim > discussion on here. Makes no difference to me. > > There really is no reason to believe Mr.Egg is Susan. Same > with Belmont. I've read Susan's posts, and they have > almost nothing in common with any other member. Lots of > people have posted replies to their own posts, including > you and Jacqueline and others whose identity is never > questioned. There isn't a single poster in the history of > this message board whose posts have been similar to > Susan's. Perhaps you should enlighten me on what > specifically you think everyone has "figured out". > > > For the record, I am against IP stamping. Do we really > want this board to turn into something where every new > member gets interrogated about their history and location, > and has a long discussion on the board about it? If the > board had been like that when you first joined, would you > have ever become a regular member? I would guess probably > not. For every one of the long-time members who are > unjustifiably getting paranoid and territorial toward > newer members, I bet they would not have become regulars > had the board been as hostile, cliquish and paranoid as it > is now when they first joined. > > IP stamping will encourage that paranoia and the whole > cyber stalking mentality. > > IP and member history checking should be done privately by > the moderators, not out in the open cluttering the board, > where it is subject to the cliques and grudges. > > If they do implement IP stamping, I think it should be > done so that only posts after a certain date are stamped. > When we all registered for this board, we were never told > IP addresses would be made public, and in my book that is > understood to be something the moderators should keep > private. That way, the posters who were never told that > their IP addresses would be made public can choose whether > or not to continue posting. > > And please do not insinuate, as usual without a shred of > evidence, that I have the same IP address as Susan. I know > hers from when she joined the Cypherd board (which I set > up only to show Smeghead how easy it is to set up your own > board) and it is neither identical nor very similar to > mine." > | |
| reply | | |
| Previous: | Bright Eyes would make a great lawyer - Mr.Egg 03:08 pm UTC 10/21/07 |
| Next: | Stewbeef would make a great butcher - Mr.Egg 10:15 pm UTC 10/21/07 |
| Thread: |
|