Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 48 of 48

Thread: Intro/advice wanted: Vegas first-timers!

  1. #41
    Originally Posted by The Boz View Post
    Originally Posted by quahaug View Post
    Micky, get back on the sauce. Maybe it will give you back your balls so you can get your nose out of Singers ass.
    Probably the worst thing ever posted here, in a history of degrading posts from many of us on this site.

    Mickey has been clean of alcohol for a long period of time and is something all of us should celebrate. I’m certainly not anti Alcohol, but I respect anyone who quits if they feel they want or need to.

    What kind of piece of shit would encourage someone to start back after quitting?

    Mick and I may disagree on some things but any decent human should respect his quitting.
    As a former offender of this concept, you are of course 100% right.

    (but he did put up some pretty colorful posts in his heyday.... )

  2. #42
    Originally Posted by quahaug View Post
    Micky, get back on the sauce. Maybe it will give you back your balls so you can get your nose out of Singers ass.
    Quahang, get your mouth off redietz’ dick so he can stick it back in your ass.
    Keystone is a mental midget.

  3. #43
    Originally Posted by mickeycrimm View Post
    Originally Posted by quahaug View Post
    Micky, get back on the sauce. Maybe it will give you back your balls so you can get your nose out of Singers ass.
    Quahang, get your mouth off redietz’ dick so he can stick it back in your ass.
    Good comeback Mick! Reditz is weird.
    I'll miss Alan's profound stupidity.

  4. #44
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    Originally Posted by mickeycrimm View Post
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post


    Jesus, Mickey, you're coming off like a complete hypocrite here. Do you hear yourself?

    "Singer" has no facts to back up what he said regarding me. Yet you say not one word about it. If you call kewlJ a liar, then be consistent and call "Singer" a liar, too. Basically you take kewlJ to task for "having no facts." What "facts" does "Singer" have regarding the soliciting claim? Answer: None.
    Redietz, you decided to play loose with the facts on the WoV controversy. Did you learn that from KJ? Make up facts as you go to suit your argument?

    Both you and KJ basically pushed Rob into going back to the old routine of trolling you because you wouldn't knock off trolling him. You got your wish. Why are you bitching about it?
    I'm not bitching. I'm just pointing out that you're being a hypocrite.

    And no, I wasn't loose with any facts regarding Babs being suspended at WoV. I reported it exactly, precisely as it occurred. This was not an example of Babs picking on righties and Shackleford stepping in. This was Babs, after Shackleford asked "Anyone else?" regarding a suspension, having Babs respond, "That would be me." When Shackleford didn't suspend her, Babs replied to one of the righties posts with a "personal attack" on purpose, thereby triggering Shackleford to suspend her. And I stand by the list of top 10 posters at WoV. The majority of posts by the top 10 are by righties. The mods are lefties. Characterizing WoV as a lefty haven because of that is silly. The rationale for Babs' "personal attack" was the inclusion of "hate speech" quotes, that had gotten righties banned, being embedded in further posts by righties without consequences because somehow that was "within the rules." Babs had an issue with that. I didn't understand the rules, which seemed self-defeating. So I self banned.

    Again, the entire "Singer" thing has been useful. Who knew you were a hypocrite? Certainly not me.
    Redietz, who knew you are a bald face liar? You used to at least feign some integrity. Your scenario, that Babs asked to be suspended and when Shack didn't suspend her she then she personally attacked AZD is false and easy to prove it is false.

    Your scenario:

    1. Shack asked if anyone else wanted to be suspended
    2. Babs said she wanted to be suspended.
    3. Shack wouldn't suspend her.
    4. She then personally attacked AZD.

    For the above to have occurred Babs would have had to make TWO POSTS, the first asking to be suspended, the 2nd, after Shack refused to suspend her, attacking AZD.

    My scenario.

    1. Babs asked to be suspended and attacked AZD all in the same post. So there was no way for Shack to refuse to suspend her....because she didn't make two posts. She made exactly one post in the thread subsequent to Shack asking if anyone else wanted to be suspended.

    The very next post of shack's he suspended her saying "That was over the line" to what she wrote about AZD calling him pond scum.

    So your "precisely" is nothing but bullshit. Shack's post asking if anyone else wanted to be suspended is on page 7 over The Gay Thread. Babs post subsequent to his page 7 post is on page 8. On page 10 Shack immediately suspends her saying "That was over the line." Babs did not make another post in the thread.

    So your scenario is complete bullshit by you. Here's the post she made on page 8. You can see she asked to be suspended and attacked AZD in the same post.
    Attached Images Attached Images  
    Keystone is a mental midget.

  5. #45
    Posted and explained factual evidence critiquing and correcting redietz are irrelevant to redietz. His "Professional PR Pkg." says so. After all, 20-40 years ago he says he was the Wiseguys' Wiseguy. Doesn't that give him any credibility leverage here??

  6. #46
    Six days later, in the Discussion About The Suspension List thread Shack used the exact same post to publicly rebuke Babs. She almost lost her moderator status. Compare her post in this screenshot to the one I put up in my prior post. You will see it is one and the same post by Babs.
    Attached Images Attached Images  
    Keystone is a mental midget.

  7. #47
    What possible difference does it make whether she posted once or twice? She was clearly out to get herself suspended because the rules allowed the righties to embed "hate speech" that was banned into current posts, and she thought that was disgusting. This was not Shackleford suspending her for picking on righties. It was Babs getting herself suspended because the policy was abhorrent. I didn't check number of posts because I self banned, therefore I do not visit the site.

    And none of that affects the hypocrisy of telling kewlJ to provide evidence of "people getting hurt" while giving "Singer" a free pass when he has zero evidence of me "soliciting" anybody. That's total hypocrisy.

  8. #48
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    What possible difference does it make whether she posted once or twice? She was clearly out to get herself suspended because the rules allowed the righties to embed "hate speech" that was banned into current posts, and she thought that was disgusting. This was not Shackleford suspending her for picking on righties. It was Babs getting herself suspended because the policy was abhorrent. I didn't check number of posts because I self banned, therefore I do not visit the site.

    And none of that affects the hypocrisy of telling kewlJ to provide evidence of "people getting hurt" while giving "Singer" a free pass when he has zero evidence of me "soliciting" anybody. That's total hypocrisy.
    You've now changed your story from "I know 'precisely' what happened" to "what difference does it make." And your story about righties quoting hate speech of others to get around being suspended is also bullshit. There is nothing quoted in that thread that was labeled hate speech. The first mention of "hate speech" in that thread was by YOU. You labeled what was being said as hate speech. But Shack didn't ban any righty in that thread. So where is the hate speech, redietz? I'll tell you where it is. It is in YOUR MIND. And that is the only place it is.

    Babs did not have to make a nasty post to get suspended. Just the request is enough. It's done all the time on WoV. Request a self-suspension or self-ban and it's honored.

    Babs blew her top. Why? Babs and the lefties couldn't get the best of AZDuffman. He put together well crafted, and polite, conservative arguments. They resorted to mock and ridicule but he kept his cool and kept cranking out great conservative arguments. When Babs tried to debate him he politely destroyed her arguments. But he wouldn't do anything bannable. It drove her nuts. She started breaking the rules herself and openly insulting him. She failed miserably in debating him so resorted to calling names. The post she got banned for was the last time, not the first time, she insulted AZD. She was pissed, not because of quotes, there was nothing in the post about quotes, but because AZDuffman's debating skills made her look like an idiot.
    Keystone is a mental midget.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 115
    Last Post: 03-16-2019, 06:02 AM
  2. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-01-2016, 10:14 AM
  3. Alan wanted to know why I was not posting. Had nothing to post
    By ke6cdh in forum California/Western US Casinos
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-30-2014, 01:55 PM
  4. I've always wanted to ask Rob this question.....
    By slingshot in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 02-08-2014, 07:43 PM
  5. Intro..
    By Steve in forum Whatever's On Your Mind
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 08-12-2013, 08:43 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •