| re: Steven_Stuart / Egg-mess | |
|
Posted by: |
steven_stuart 06:40 pm UTC 04/02/09 |
| In reply to: | Steven_Stuart / Egg-mess - Klasien 11:02 am UTC 04/02/09 |
| > This post is not so much for Steven as it is for those > hitting him over the head for every move he makes. > > You guys are a bunch of hypocritical cunts and I am not > afraid to say so. > Klasien, many thanks for your post. I have really been under fire here during the past few days. Most of it is very unfair and made me feel a bit low. But your post really cheered me up. I am very glad that you have the guts to stand up to people like Smeghead. Pudding asked me how I knew what was in Jim's script and I told him that I have read several versions of the script. Which I have. Not only am I related to one of the producers and good friends with another but I also do a lot of voluntary work for the show. Jim and JD absolutely know who I am. Jim has asked me to send him my opinions about different versions of the script and I tried very hard to send him proffesional written reviews. On several occasions Jim has been very happy with my reviews and I saw one that he sent to JD where she added some very kind comments. I don't expect any special treatment in the context of this board. I am just a fan like everyone else. I was comparing a recently opened West End show to Bat Out Of Hell The Musical but I should have told Pudding that I was comparing the recently opened West End show to the brief outline of Jim's Obsidian story that everyone is familiar with. A rock version of Peter Pan, set in Obsidian (post-apocalyptic New York), which is ruled over by the evil police chief Hook. Just that information would have allowed me to compare the recently opened show with Jim's show. His basic story is so much better. Smeghead's reaction was horrible and unjust. He complains about spamming but I don't know what he thinks some of his posts are. He called me a "lying cunt" without any proof to back up his insult. Then he said that I should be banned. If Pudding mentions Susan in a post (which he frequently does), it doesn't bother Smeghead. Pudding is not spamming the board. The same goes for Evil One. During the Letter From Porkington thread I was accused of using Susan's name to spam the board but it was Evil One who brought her name into the thread. I have given my reasons why publishing that letter was not an attempt to spam the board but Evil One didn't bother to read my post. It was his reply to my post that introduced Susan to the thread. If Pudding had published that letter, there would have been no criticism from Smeghead or Evil One. You are right to say that they are hypocrits. I think Pudding and Smeghead see themselves as the old guard. It is they who think they deserve special treatment in the context of this board. Perhaps they don't like newcomers. I don't know. But it is one rule for them and a different one for everyone else. Pudding will probably reply to this either by mocking me or by dismissing this post as gibberish. It's not possible to have a serious discussion with either Smeghead or Pudding. As you said in your post, they just hit me over the head when ever they get a chance. And then Smeghead will say that I deserve to be banned. I would like to be friendly with Smeghead and Pudding. I like JD's "peace to you" phrase. But it's difficult when I get called a "lying cunt" for saying something that is absolutely true. | |
| reply | | |
| Previous: | re: Steven_Stuart / Egg-mess - lotus_nz 08:41 am UTC 04/03/09 |
| Next: | re: Steven_Stuart / Egg-mess - Pudding 09:37 pm UTC 04/02/09 |
| Thread: |
|