Renton 22082 Posted May 9, 2009 Share Posted May 9, 2009 still crying then. Still fighting Dr. Hypocrisy wherever he is found. But Fop loves how a Fop post draws manc-foplite within seconds at any time of the day or night. Frantic & If you can't identify the difference between a ''Not Safe For Work'' thread entitled ''What Men Want'' posted at 12:18 AM on a Saturday morning and a thread entitled ''College'' posted in the middle of Wednesday afternoon that's your problem. Doyle. Read his posts. He literally can't tell the difference about stuff like this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted May 9, 2009 Share Posted May 9, 2009 still crying then. Still fighting Dr. Hypocrisy wherever he is found. But Fop loves how a Fop post draws manc-foplite within seconds at any time of the day or night. Frantic & If you can't identify the difference between a ''Not Safe For Work'' thread entitled ''What Men Want'' posted at 12:18 AM on a Saturday morning and a thread entitled ''College'' posted in the middle of Wednesday afternoon that's your problem. Doyle. Read his posts. He literally can't tell the difference about stuff like this. ah, the board boffin speaks again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted May 9, 2009 Share Posted May 9, 2009 still crying then. Still fighting Dr. Hypocrisy wherever he is found. But Fop loves how a Fop post draws manc-foplite within seconds at any time of the day or night. Frantic & If you can't identify the difference between a ''Not Safe For Work'' thread entitled ''What Men Want'' posted at 12:18 AM on a Saturday morning and a thread entitled ''College'' posted in the middle of Wednesday afternoon that's your problem. Doyle. Fair enough (ignoring that you previously said it was purely personal), except that "NSFW" isn't on loads of threads that still contain things much much worse than the utterly innocuous stuff that was deleted, and time of posting? So just to be clear.... you are now saying that if a thread is posted between a specific time and has a certain title (that need not contain NSFW) that it is "ok" to post innocuous pictures? But one posted at another time which has a different title (and does not contain NSFW) isn't "ok" to post them? Forgive Fop but that's not exactly "clear". And when is it "ok" to fiddle with a signature? (just to be absolutely clear?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted May 9, 2009 Share Posted May 9, 2009 Read his posts. He literally can't tell the difference about stuff like this. So when is it "ok" to post innocuous pictures, as you seem to fully understand these new "rules". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted May 9, 2009 Share Posted May 9, 2009 Fop is seething. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted May 9, 2009 Share Posted May 9, 2009 Fop is seething. Just getting things straight, should be no trouble as Renton understand it all. After all it's fair enough if Tom still says it's purely personal like he initially did, but that's not what he's saying now, so if there are new general rules then it just makes sense to be clear about them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom 14021 Posted May 9, 2009 Share Posted May 9, 2009 still crying then. Still fighting Dr. Hypocrisy wherever he is found. But Fop loves how a Fop post draws manc-foplite within seconds at any time of the day or night. Frantic & If you can't identify the difference between a ''Not Safe For Work'' thread entitled ''What Men Want'' posted at 12:18 AM on a Saturday morning and a thread entitled ''College'' posted in the middle of Wednesday afternoon that's your problem. Doyle. Fair enough (ignoring that you previously said it was purely personal), except that "NSFW" isn't on loads of threads that still contain things much much worse than the utterly innocuous stuff that was deleted, and time of posting? So just to be clear.... you are now saying that if a thread is posted between a specific time and has a certain title (that need not contain NSFW) that it is "ok" to post innocuous pictures? But one posted at another time which has a different title (and does not contain NSFW) isn't "ok" to post them? Forgive Fop but that's not exactly "clear". And when is it "ok" to fiddle with a signature? (just to be absolutely clear?) I suggest you employ some common sense. A thread called ''Facebook Fanny'' for instance - just might be not safe for work. A thread called ''Funny pictures thread'' probably holds a 75% chance of containing NSFW material. Nobody else is complaining or writing a book detailing NSFWGate, so just calm down and be quiet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jusoda Kid 1 Posted May 9, 2009 Share Posted May 9, 2009 We haven't had a fight. he's done nowt wrong today Two different people should disagree at times, cos they're DIFFERENT, duh. Bollocks one of your parents is rolling over and playing dead just for a fucking quiet life. .....or may be one of them is just agreeing cos they're fucking the life out of someone else quietly! You in the scratcher? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jusoda Kid 1 Posted May 9, 2009 Share Posted May 9, 2009 FOP! I'd rather listen to fucking hair grow than read you mind numbing posts these days, get a life you boring cunt or even better get yourself a willing sexual partner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted May 9, 2009 Share Posted May 9, 2009 still crying then. Still fighting Dr. Hypocrisy wherever he is found. But Fop loves how a Fop post draws manc-foplite within seconds at any time of the day or night. Frantic & If you can't identify the difference between a ''Not Safe For Work'' thread entitled ''What Men Want'' posted at 12:18 AM on a Saturday morning and a thread entitled ''College'' posted in the middle of Wednesday afternoon that's your problem. Doyle. Fair enough (ignoring that you previously said it was purely personal), except that "NSFW" isn't on loads of threads that still contain things much much worse than the utterly innocuous stuff that was deleted, and time of posting? So just to be clear.... you are now saying that if a thread is posted between a specific time and has a certain title (that need not contain NSFW) that it is "ok" to post innocuous pictures? But one posted at another time which has a different title (and does not contain NSFW) isn't "ok" to post them? Forgive Fop but that's not exactly "clear". And when is it "ok" to fiddle with a signature? (just to be absolutely clear?) I suggest you employ some common sense. A thread called ''Facebook Fanny'' for instance - just might be not safe for work. A thread called ''Funny pictures thread'' probably holds a 75% chance of containing NSFW material. Nobody else is complaining or writing a book detailing NSFWGate, so just calm down and be quiet. Fair enough, just getting things clear. Although Fop still doesn't understand this title/percentage chance NSFW idea. What if a title suggests it is 25% NSFW and yet it is completely SFW or a title suggests it is 100% SFW and it turns out it isn't. And what exactly is ok to post in a SFW thread? Fop doesn't want to break the rules, but frankly these are confusing. You still didn't say when it was ok to fiddle with sigs though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted May 9, 2009 Share Posted May 9, 2009 FOP! I'd rather listen to fucking hair grow than read you mind numbing posts these days, get a life you boring cunt or even better get yourself a willing sexual partner. Fop's not having sex with you either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom 14021 Posted May 9, 2009 Share Posted May 9, 2009 still crying then. Still fighting Dr. Hypocrisy wherever he is found. But Fop loves how a Fop post draws manc-foplite within seconds at any time of the day or night. Frantic & If you can't identify the difference between a ''Not Safe For Work'' thread entitled ''What Men Want'' posted at 12:18 AM on a Saturday morning and a thread entitled ''College'' posted in the middle of Wednesday afternoon that's your problem. Doyle. Fair enough (ignoring that you previously said it was purely personal), except that "NSFW" isn't on loads of threads that still contain things much much worse than the utterly innocuous stuff that was deleted, and time of posting? So just to be clear.... you are now saying that if a thread is posted between a specific time and has a certain title (that need not contain NSFW) that it is "ok" to post innocuous pictures? But one posted at another time which has a different title (and does not contain NSFW) isn't "ok" to post them? Forgive Fop but that's not exactly "clear". And when is it "ok" to fiddle with a signature? (just to be absolutely clear?) I suggest you employ some common sense. A thread called ''Facebook Fanny'' for instance - just might be not safe for work. A thread called ''Funny pictures thread'' probably holds a 75% chance of containing NSFW material. Nobody else is complaining or writing a book detailing NSFWGate, so just calm down and be quiet. Fair enough, just getting things clear. Although Fop still doesn't understand this title/percentage chance NSFW idea. What if a title suggests it is 25% NSFW and yet it is completely SFW or a title suggests it is 100% SFW and it turns out it isn't. And what exactly is ok to post in a SFW thread? Fop doesn't want to break the rules, but frankly these are confusing. You still didn't say when it was ok to fiddle with sigs though. Didn't you like Trophyshy's picture? I though it was class, like a contemporary impressionist throwing blood on the forum canvas. Try to keep it clean when you can - and get off the wind up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted May 9, 2009 Share Posted May 9, 2009 still crying then. Still fighting Dr. Hypocrisy wherever he is found. But Fop loves how a Fop post draws manc-foplite within seconds at any time of the day or night. Frantic & If you can't identify the difference between a ''Not Safe For Work'' thread entitled ''What Men Want'' posted at 12:18 AM on a Saturday morning and a thread entitled ''College'' posted in the middle of Wednesday afternoon that's your problem. Doyle. Fair enough (ignoring that you previously said it was purely personal), except that "NSFW" isn't on loads of threads that still contain things much much worse than the utterly innocuous stuff that was deleted, and time of posting? So just to be clear.... you are now saying that if a thread is posted between a specific time and has a certain title (that need not contain NSFW) that it is "ok" to post innocuous pictures? But one posted at another time which has a different title (and does not contain NSFW) isn't "ok" to post them? Forgive Fop but that's not exactly "clear". And when is it "ok" to fiddle with a signature? (just to be absolutely clear?) I suggest you employ some common sense. A thread called ''Facebook Fanny'' for instance - just might be not safe for work. A thread called ''Funny pictures thread'' probably holds a 75% chance of containing NSFW material. Nobody else is complaining or writing a book detailing NSFWGate, so just calm down and be quiet. Fair enough, just getting things clear. Although Fop still doesn't understand this title/percentage chance NSFW idea. What if a title suggests it is 25% NSFW and yet it is completely SFW or a title suggests it is 100% SFW and it turns out it isn't. And what exactly is ok to post in a SFW thread? Fop doesn't want to break the rules, but frankly these are confusing. You still didn't say when it was ok to fiddle with sigs though. Didn't you like Trophyshy's picture? I though it was class, like a contemporary impressionist throwing blood on the forum canvas. Try to keep it clean when you can - and get off the wind up. Ah so that was you. It was quite funny, but you're kinda throwing stones from a glass house saying the above and then doing that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom 14021 Posted May 9, 2009 Share Posted May 9, 2009 My house is made of plexiglass and your glass is single glazing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manc-mag 1 Posted May 9, 2009 Share Posted May 9, 2009 Fop is seething. So obvious, like. Absolutely beyond help Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jusoda Kid 1 Posted May 9, 2009 Share Posted May 9, 2009 Dullard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted May 9, 2009 Share Posted May 9, 2009 My house is made of plexiglass and your glass is single glazing. True, as Fop's said before you can clearly do as you like, but equally it is fair enough to point it out isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted May 9, 2009 Share Posted May 9, 2009 Fop is seething. So obvious, like. Absolutely beyond help no winding up here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manc-mag 1 Posted May 9, 2009 Share Posted May 9, 2009 My house is made of plexiglass and your glass is single glazing. True, as Fop's said before you can clearly do as you like, but equally it is fair enough to point it out isn't it? 5,000, 000 times? Absolutely incandescent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paddy 17 Posted May 9, 2009 Share Posted May 9, 2009 OH! whats occuring?? is this over the picture of the fat lass with spinich on her norks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted May 9, 2009 Share Posted May 9, 2009 My house is made of plexiglass and your glass is single glazing. True, as Fop's said before you can clearly do as you like, but equally it is fair enough to point it out isn't it? 5,000, 000 times? Absolutely incandescent. you're still trying to WUM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted May 9, 2009 Share Posted May 9, 2009 Don't know who I pity more. Him or his carer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jusoda Kid 1 Posted May 9, 2009 Share Posted May 9, 2009 Don't know who I pity more. Him or his carer. He's not right like and I'm being serious here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted May 9, 2009 Share Posted May 9, 2009 Don't know who I pity more. Him or his carer. See no WUMing here, not ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Douggy B 0 Posted May 9, 2009 Share Posted May 9, 2009 (edited) Don't know who I pity more. Him or his carer. He's not right like and I'm being serious here. I don't like to agree with these two but I have to. The irony is that all this attention will be feeding his psychosis. Edited May 9, 2009 by Danny B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now