nfreeman Posted September 8, 2009 Report Posted September 8, 2009 What's the deal with these tards lately. Where do they see any thoughts on this thread's topic? It should be obvious that they don't have anything to comment on here because they don't have a clue regarding the players union meeting in question. So why do they pretend to? Of course nobody here knows what went on in that meeting. I don't think anyone is pretending to, either. That doesn't mean that someone can't have an opinion on what the continued upheaval in the NHLPA means for the the state of the game. As far as TC and Gaustad, you've probably noticed that there are plenty of Sabres fans who don't like TC (I'm not one of them, although I understand the frustration). The poster here who probably takes the most shots at TC -- many of which I have found ridiculous and have called him on them -- is still a very knowledgeable and passionate hockey fan. And I don't think there's anything unreasonable in the position that Gaustad's physicality (even if it's not there as consistently as we'd like) benefits his smaller teammates. Even if he doesn't play on Roy's line, hockey is often an eye-for-an-eye situation, so having guys like Gaustad on the checking line -- which will often be out against one of the opposition's top 2 lines -- can be a deterrent against players taking liberties with the Sabres' scorers. You may not agree, but it's hardly a crazy notion deserving of insult. Knowledgeable and passionate hockey fans are always welcome here, but please try to communicate in a respectful manner.
... Posted September 8, 2009 Report Posted September 8, 2009 nfreeman, you have the patience of Job. Shrader is pretty close, too. You realize that this dude is just trying to shake the nest, right? He/she/it has some interesting thoughts, but is clearly not interested in "discourse", seeing as it comes across as appealing as a used tampon. The question of whether or not anyone but the people who were in on the meeting should discuss the meeting and subsequent news is ludicrous. Unless we're all looking for a diversion until Saturday morning, I would avoid falling for this person's forum-crapping traps. Let it satisfy its smartest-thing-in-the-room ego issues on some other forum.
nfreeman Posted September 8, 2009 Report Posted September 8, 2009 nfreeman, you have the patience of Job. Shrader is pretty close, too. You realize that this dude is just trying to shake the nest, right? He/she/it has some interesting thoughts, but is clearly not interested in "discourse", seeing as it comes across as appealing as a used tampon. The question of whether or not anyone but the people who were in on the meeting should discuss the meeting and subsequent news is ludicrous. Unless we're all looking for a diversion until Saturday morning, I would avoid falling for this person's forum-crapping traps. Let it satisfy its smartest-thing-in-the-room ego issues on some other forum. Thanks. I think I'm just old. There have been plenty of other posters who've come in slinging insults (maybe because that is the tone on some other boards, or maybe just because of immaturity or bad manners), and then toned it way down and stayed a while. I'm hoping that will be the case here too. I really do believe that the more knowledgeable and passionate Sabres fans here, the better.
... Posted September 8, 2009 Report Posted September 8, 2009 Thanks. I think I'm just old. There have been plenty of other posters who've come in slinging insults (maybe because that is the tone on some other boards, or maybe just because of immaturity or bad manners), and then toned it way down and stayed a while. I'm hoping that will be the case here too. I really do believe that the more knowledgeable and passionate Sabres fans here, the better. Let's hope you're right. I agree that the conversations here are usually pretty solid.
KK6666 Posted September 8, 2009 Report Posted September 8, 2009 nfreeman, you have the patience of Job. Shrader is pretty close, too. You realize that this dude is just trying to shake the nest, right? He/she/it has some interesting thoughts, but is clearly not interested in "discourse", seeing as it comes across as appealing as a used tampon. That's too transparent even for a teenage girl like you. Here I gave it a direct translation.... Oh moderators you have such a tough job and I commend you Now will you please moderate for me here now that I've shoved my nose so far up your azz I cannot count the times I've seen girls on forums try to pull this maneuver. Pathetic groveling. She pitched both nfreeman and Shrader. LOL
... Posted September 8, 2009 Report Posted September 8, 2009 That's too transparent even for teenage girl like you. Here I gave it a direct translation.... Hey, KK6666, it's okay, buddy. We're your friends here and we can help. A lot of people have unresolved childhood issues - was someone mean to you, were you touched in the wrong places? Just let the words flow and get it all out.
KK6666 Posted September 8, 2009 Report Posted September 8, 2009 touched in the wrong places? Just let the words flow and get it all out. Don't try to project the experiences you had with your father onto anyone else here. Was it just you and your sister or your brothers too?
KK6666 Posted September 8, 2009 Report Posted September 8, 2009 Of course nobody here knows what went on in that meeting. I don't think anyone is pretending to, either. That doesn't mean that someone can't have an opinion on what the continued upheaval in the NHLPA means for the the state of the game. It's sort of useless to have an opinion on how it will effect the game without having a clue what was discussed. He might have been fired for how he handled union funds for all anyone knows. Could be anything. As far as TC and Gaustad, you've probably noticed that there are plenty of Sabres fans who don't like TC (I'm not one of them, although I understand the frustration). The poster here who probably takes the most shots at TC -- many of which I have found ridiculous and have called him on them -- is still a very knowledgeable and passionate hockey fan. Liking or disliking a player really doesn't have much to do with not knowing the relative value of players. That is just flat out ridiculous as you said. And guess what I said exactly the same thing, so where is the issue? And I don't think there's anything unreasonable in the position that Gaustad's physicality (even if it's not there as consistently as we'd like) benefits his smaller teammates. The comment was that Gaustad opened up ice for skill players and with a derogatory tone towards the skill players. I stated as a matter of fact that he does not because he isn't paired with skill players. The skill players on this team make their own space for the most part. You may not agree, but it's hardly a crazy notion deserving of insult. Knowledgeable and passionate hockey fans are always welcome here, but please try to communicate in a respectful manner. I'll have you know, not that it will make a difference to you, that I didn't say anything personally offensive to anyone until they did so first. The irony is that you have this pervert talking about kids being touched in the wrong places and you're ok with that sick idiot. Then when moderators overlook these twisted kids people like me have no choice but to respond in kind and it escalates. And all of it in relation to what?...me stating that these people have no knowledge of what is taking place in those union meetings? Yeah that makes a lot of sense.
nfreeman Posted September 8, 2009 Report Posted September 8, 2009 It's sort of useless to have an opinion on how it will effect the game without having a clue what was discussed. He might have been fired for how he handled union funds for all anyone knows. Could be anything. Liking or disliking a player really doesn't have much to do with not knowing the relative value of players. That is just flat out ridiculous as you said. And guess what I said exactly the same thing, so where is the issue? The comment was that Gaustad opened up ice for skill players and with a derogatory tone towards the skill players. I stated as a matter of fact that he does not because he isn't paired with skill players. The skill players on this team make their own space for the most part. I'll have you know, not that it will make a difference to you, that I didn't say anything personally offensive to anyone until they did so first. The irony is that you have this pervert talking about kids being touched in the wrong places and you're ok with that sick idiot. Then when moderators overlook these twisted kids people like me have no choice but to respond in kind and it escalates. And all of it in relation to what?...me stating that these people have no knowledge of what is taking place in those union meetings? Yeah that makes a lot of sense. Nothing really to be gained by a forensic analysis of "who started it". Let's just move on. Your hockey posts are good and worthwhile contributions to the board. I'm confident that if you (and everyone else) communicate with others here in a respectful manner it will be reciprocated.
shrader Posted September 8, 2009 Report Posted September 8, 2009 It's sort of useless to have an opinion on how it will effect the game without having a clue what was discussed. He might have been fired for how he handled union funds for all anyone knows. Could be anything. It doesn't take any inside knowledge of that specific meeting to know that Kelly had probably the closest relationship to the NHL that any NHLPA head ever had. With the expiration of the CBA on the horizon, the timing pretty much sucks. Yeah, it's very possible that nothing comes of this, but it's an obvious reason for concern.
spndnchz Posted September 8, 2009 Report Posted September 8, 2009 What's the deal with these tards lately. Where do they see any thoughts on this thread's topic? It should be obvious that they don't have anything to comment on here because they don't have a clue regarding the players union meeting in question. So why do they pretend to? It's a forum for opinions. Agree or disagree. If you've got an opinion, great, voice it and back it up. No need to go postal on fellow posters. You can save that for youtube. A person cannot have an opinion on something they are not privy to. Therefore they do not have an opinion on what is taking place in those union meetings. I believe Mbossy post was in response to you meaning "they" as fellow posters. As far as being privy to anything, are any of us really "in the loop" on anything. This is a messageboard, soundingboard, discussion board and a way to to talk to everyone and no one at the same time. Lighten up.
KK6666 Posted September 8, 2009 Report Posted September 8, 2009 I believe Mbossy post was in response to you meaning "they" as fellow posters. As far as being privy to anything, are any of us really "in the loop" on anything. This is a messageboard, soundingboard, discussion board and a way to to talk to everyone and no one at the same time. Lighten up. I believe you conveniently left off the post that instigated my reply. Either that or you have a thick skull and low comprehension. This is what preceeded my post... What's the deal with all these new posters showing up lately and being arrogant pricks? If you don't want to read people's thoughts on these subjects, why would you ever sign up for a messageboard? Then I replied with.... What's the deal with these tards lately. Where do they see any thoughts on this thread's topic? It should be obvious that they don't have anything to comment on here because they don't have a clue regarding the players union meeting in question. So why do they pretend to? So keep the record straight boy.
Mbossy Posted September 8, 2009 Report Posted September 8, 2009 I believe you conveniently left off the post that instigated my reply. Either that or you have a thick skull and low comprehension. This is what preceeded my post... Then I replied with.... So keep the record straight boy. Wow, you might try this. And for the record, she's a girl, and a pretty knowledgeable one at that.
KK6666 Posted September 8, 2009 Report Posted September 8, 2009 Nothing really to be gained by a forensic analysis of "who started it". Let's just move on. Your hockey posts are good and worthwhile contributions to the board. I'm confident that if you (and everyone else) communicate with others here in a respectful manner it will be reciprocated. Of course nothing is to be gained by identifying "who started it" in this particular case, because in this case it is someone you choose not to moderate. Nothing is to be gained by indentifying "who started it"yet you are STILL directing your comments towards the person who responded in kind, very convenient, very transparent too. But NOT a single comment from you directed at the pervert who instigated it because...get this one...it is not important...well now who would have guessed. Why? Answer: because there IS something to be gained for you...you moderate on the basis of who kisses your azz. You aren't really moderating you are looking for recognition more than anything else Here let's look and see....... Here's the brown noser with his little game...... nfreeman, you have the patience of Job. Shrader is pretty close, too. You realize that this dude is just trying to shake the nest, right? He/she/it has some interesting thoughts, but is clearly not interested in "discourse", seeing as it comes across as appealing as a used tampon. The question of whether or not anyone but the people who were in on the meeting should discuss the meeting and subsequent news is ludicrous. Unless we're all looking for a diversion until Saturday morning, I would avoid falling for this person's forum-crapping traps. Let it satisfy its smartest-thing-in-the-room ego issues on some other forum. Now here is you with your oh golly gee thank you Thanks. I think I'm just old. There have been plenty of other posters who've come in slinging insults (maybe because that is the tone on some other boards, or maybe just because of immaturity or bad manners), and then toned it way down and stayed a while. I'm hoping that will be the case here too. I really do believe that the more knowledgeable and passionate Sabres fans here, the better. Now the brown noser has license to go off with his perversion..... Hey, KK6666, it's okay, buddy. We're your friends here and we can help. A lot of people have unresolved childhood issues - was someone mean to you, were you touched in the wrong places? Just let the words flow and get it all out. And who does Mr. Moderator decide to moderate? Answer: not the pervert, he moderates against the other party...me Because the moderator really isn't a moderator, the recognition he got from that brown nosing rendered any code of conduct null and void. Pathetic. To this point you have said zero to the instigator. Zero about his perverted comments. Perverts are ok with you as long as they give you some recognition. That is why you claim it is unimportant "who started it", because you have no intention of actually moderating in the first place. So when you say it's unimportant "who started it", you say that in these special cases of yours. This way you convince yourself, by telling yourself this crap, I see right through it. Oldest garbage in the book. But for some odd reason you have come after me on more than one occasion. Why is that? Simple answer.... Here's the brown noser with his little gimmick...... nfreeman, you have the patience of Job. Shrader is pretty close, too. You realize that this dude is just trying to shake the nest, right? He/she/it has some interesting thoughts, but is clearly not interested in "discourse", seeing as it comes across as appealing as a used tampon. Right after his apple polishing sausagemeister fires the first insult knowing that he now has license to say anything he chooses because nfreeman is giddy with the recognition he needs.
nfreeman Posted September 8, 2009 Report Posted September 8, 2009 I believe you conveniently left off the post that instigated my reply. Either that or you have a thick skull and low comprehension. This is what preceeded my post... Then I replied with.... So keep the record straight boy. Or maybe she just read your first post in this thread, which was pretty obnoxious and unfriendly: No one here knows who Ian Penny is or how he differs from Paul Kelly. Does this thread itself have any purpose on this forum other than the fact that on every forum there will be someone who posts any article concerning the NHL? Of course nothing is to be gained when it clear who instigated it. Nothing is to be gained yet you are STILL directing your comments towards me. NOT a single comment from you directed at the pervert. Why? Answer: because there IS something to be gained for you...you moderate on the basis of who kisses your azz. You aren't really moderating you are looking for recognition more than anything else Here let's look and see....... Here's the brown noser with his little game...... Now here is you with your oh golly gee thank you Now the brown noser has license to go off with his perversion..... And who does Mr. Moderator decide to moderate? Answer: not the pervert, he moderates against the other party...me Because the moderator really isn't a moderator, the recognition he got from that little bit of brown nosing rendered any code of conduct null and void. You covet the recognition, pathetic. To this point you have said zero to the instigator. Zero about his perverted comment. Perverts are ok as long as they give you some recognition. That is why you claim it is unimportant "who started it", because you have no intention of actually moderating in the first place. So when you say it's unimportant "who started it" you do that in these special cases of yours. Oldest garbage in the book/ But for some odd reason you have come after me on more than one occasion. Why is that? Simple answer.... Here's the brown noser with his little gimmick...... Right after his apple polishing sausagemeister fires the first insult knowing that he now has license to say anything he choose because nfreeman is giddy with recognition. Wow. How about a few facts: 1. I'm not a moderator on this board -- just a member who appreciates good, civil, knowledgeable hockey talk. 2. The exchange you posted above shows that the "touch yourself" post was made AFTER I encouraged you to communicate respectfully. 3. You then posted a "he started it" response. Not wanting to put you on the spot (although IMHO you were clearly the instigator with the obnoxious post quoted above), I said there is no point in debating who started it, that we should just move on and that your hockey posts were good. 4. In a different thread, I asked Sizzle to tone down certain aspects of his posts (although not related to his exchanges with you). 5. I'd encourage you to search the entire board for posts made since you joined and find any that are as hostile and insulting as your posts in this thread. 6. I'm done with this topic.
KK6666 Posted September 8, 2009 Report Posted September 8, 2009 Or maybe she just read your first post in this thread, which was pretty obnoxious and unfriendly: Wow. How about a few facts: 1. I'm not a moderator on this board -- just a member who appreciates good, civil, knowledgeable hockey talk. 2. The exchange you posted above shows that the "touch yourself" post was made AFTER I encouraged you to communicate respectfully. 3. You then posted a "he started it" response. Not wanting to put you on the spot (although IMHO you were clearly the instigator with the obnoxious post quoted above), I said there is no point in debating who started it, that we should just move on and that your hockey posts were good. 4. In a different thread, I asked Sizzle to tone down certain aspects of his posts (although not related to his exchanges with you). 5. I'd encourage you to search the entire board for posts made since you joined and find any that are as hostile and insulting as your posts in this thread. 6. I'm done with this topic. You are full of sh*t . You have shown nothing of the kind. The first insults clearly came from that prevert and you have shown zero to demonstrated otherwise. As far as searching the board for insults that are more hostile than mine they are right here in this thread just scroll up to my previous post you dumbass. As I said you are completely blind to suasagemesters comments because you are some pathetic little kiddie in need of the ass kissing he gave you.
... Posted September 8, 2009 Report Posted September 8, 2009 Haha, KK6666, you're a genuine psycho. I spotted your behavior long before I made any remark - it's pretty easy with the time stamps to determine when you were laying in to the other members. The mods don't know me from Adam and I have a feeling they, and most people here, are more intelligent than to fall for some shallow brown-nosing, despite your attempt to paint a different picture. You're confusing a built-up respect and rapport amongst members here for something you can try and twist to make yourself look innocent. Anyway, here's hoping you get the counseling you need. I'm done with this, too. God bless the ignore feature.
KK6666 Posted September 8, 2009 Report Posted September 8, 2009 Haha, KK6666, you're a genuine psycho. I spotted your behavior long before I made any remark - it's pretty easy with the time stamps to determine when you were laying in to the other members. The mods don't know me from Adam and I have a feeling they, and most people here, are more intelligent than to fall for some shallow brown-nosing, despite your attempt to paint a different picture. You're confusing a built-up respect and rapport amongst members here for something you can try and twist to make yourself look innocent. Anyway, here's hoping you get the counseling you need. I'm done with this, too. God bless the ignore feature. You are a brown-nosing pervert, kid, and nothing more. You think you built up respect by what means? Your post count? You think your post count makes your perverted mind respectable? I need counseling? This is coming from some pervert who I never conversed with prior who jumps right into a conversation with his comments about "being touched in the wrong places". Nice try pervert.
KK6666 Posted September 8, 2009 Report Posted September 8, 2009 Wow. How about a few facts: 5. I'd encourage you to search the entire board for posts made since you joined and find any that are as hostile and insulting as your posts in this thread. No I challenge you. I challenge you to quote anything from me that even approaches that pervert's comments, excluding my replies to the pervert himself/itself. I have said nothing on this board to anyone that even approaches it. My commentary has been strictly harmless banter like... don't quit your day job did you ever think of pursuing a job as a sports writer Now that you have blabbered your lies, show me the comments. Show me any unprovoked comment from me that even approaches what comes out of that pervert. Do you know how I am sure that you will not find anything. Because I have a personal code of conduct I always follow. But with people like you and sausagemeister, I reply in kind. Once someone break outs any name calling or perversions I respond in kind, I don't take any lip from that pervert or anyone defending him/her/it.
nobody Posted September 8, 2009 Report Posted September 8, 2009 What ever happened with that 1+1 question?
shrader Posted September 8, 2009 Report Posted September 8, 2009 What ever happened with that 1+1 question? It needs to be replaced by some sort of social interaction quiz.
spndnchz Posted September 9, 2009 Report Posted September 9, 2009 I believe you conveniently left off the post that instigated my reply. Either that or you have a thick skull and low comprehension. This is what preceeded my post... Then I replied with.... So keep the record straight boy. What? U think I can't read? Maybe it's because U can't spell. and...........blocked.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.