FoodBanter.com - View Single Post

TFM®[_5_]

Dan Krueger wrote:
> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 13 May 2006 08:24:37 -0600, Kevin S. Wilson >
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On Sat, 13 May 2006 13:49:28 GMT, "kilikini"
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> "Big Jim" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>>> "TMG" > wrote in message
>>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>>> TFM® wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> TMG wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Pretty sure you don't know about most of us. Isn't your "dream"
>>>>>>>> over
>>>>>>>> when the professional trades (electricians and plumbers) show up?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Were it not for the (ahem) humble framers, you mechanical bitches
>>>>>>> would
>>>>>>> have nowhere to work.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So the guys that do the site work and poor the slab are your god.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> So tell us TMG. How do you "poor a slab" Take it's money away from
>>>>> it?<g>
>>>>> --
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ha, you tell 'em Jim.
>>>
>>>
>>> Yeah, a devestating spelling flame, followed by a ham-handed attempt
>>> at humor that relies on violently wrenching the English language so
>>> that a noun/adjective becomes a verb. I'll bet TMG is sobbing like a
>>> scared schoolgirl right about now.
>>>
>>>
>>>> I'm tired of dealing with these ****ers from ARK.
>>>
>>>
>>> There's no gun to your head, I assume.
>>>
>>>
>>>> I've said my piece, they flamed me and now I've got them on my back.
>>
>>
>>
>> Is she still whining? I thought she was going to go make breakfast
>> and work in the yard. She even implied that she had better things to
>> do than post, while other people did not. Yet she continued to post.
>> I don't suppose she would see the humor in that.
>>
>> Free clue #1 for kili: Usenet is a two-way communication medium. When
>> you post something, other people may respond. If you respond to them,
>> they may respond to you. It's as stupid to say someone is "on your
>> back" as it would be to say that you are "on their back" when you
>> respond to them.
>>
>> Free clue #2: Disagreeing with you is not "flaming." Pointing out
>> errors of logic in your posts is not "flaming." Suggesting that you
>> let your husband post as he pleases without your interference is not
>> "flaming."
>>
>> Free clue #3: Telling people they obviously have nothing better to do
>> and *you* are going to go do something "better"--and then continuing
>> to stay here and post might be seen by some as hypocritical. Not that
>> you necessarily are. Maybe you're just addicted to having the last
>> word and being seen as "right." I'm just telling you what other
>> people might think, which you seem to care so deeply about when it
>> comes to your husband.
>>
>> BW
>
>
> Are you really so bored that you have to jump into every post? If your
> life is that bad, please limit your lame replies to two lines or less.

Ijo la chingada, Dank, WTF?

Dan, Dank, whatever you prefer to be called, you're a dumbass here.

Goddammit man, just go away gracefully.

I wasn't invitied, but at least I have a modicum of sense. You're left
out on that one.

Why do you insist on proving that you're the most semi-literate
sub-human on the planet?

Hugs, mah niggah,

--
TFM®