RE: Angry subs.

RE: Angry subs. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

happylittlepet -> RE: Angry subs. (12/29/2009 10:59:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: osf go back and take the post in context of the preceding posts i can tolerate your views but i have a problem with your dishonesty Lamest and lowest response you have given so far. Very revealing.

Justme696 -> RE: Angry subs. (12/29/2009 11:00:46 AM)
I will explain when we are alone [:D]

osf -> RE: Angry subs. (12/29/2009 11:02:28 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: happylittlepet quote: ORIGINAL: osf go back and take the post in context of the preceding posts i can tolerate your views but i have a problem with your dishonesty Lamest and lowest response you have given so far. Very revealing. people that use quotes out of context are called liars and politicians

lizi -> RE: Angry subs. (12/29/2009 11:05:15 AM)
Back on topic: The negative profiles are spread out across every category on this site and any other personals site - Doms/Dommes, subs/slaves, switches, TGs, etc. Whatever category you're looking in there will be some negative profiles. The people posting them are frustrated, upset, bitter...whatever. It's a bad strategy to use in finding your SO to announce what you are NOT looking for and what you DON'T want in strident agressive terms but people do that all the time and then wonder why they don't get anywhere. I also have to say that I understand it from the sub viewpoint. I get so worn down and upset by what comes into my inbox...honestly, you'd be shocked at the idiots out there that treat you like absolute doodoo. I sometimes hide my profile because I can't take it anymore. Men are deliberately offensive, they are nasty, they completely disregard what I've written in my profile and just do whatever they want - ignoring the social conventions of being polite as a default. If this is so hard to imagine then do what some others have suggested and put up a sub womens profile and see what happens. I happen to agree that I show no deference beyond basic politeness to someone else until they merit a special status. I'm not here for just anyone. In fact if someone expects a title from me before I even know who he is, he gets tossed out automatically because I can see at that point that he is deluded on what he thinks D/s is. It's not a game and I not some sort of fill-in-the-blanks sub playing a part to anyone who wants me to.

QuirkyAnne -> RE: Angry subs. (12/29/2009 11:05:33 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lizi Being a poor typist does not mean you cannot use spellcheck or be more clear in what you post here. It's an excuse and it's coming across like one. And honestly with as much posting as you do on here I'd think the repeated use of your typing skills such as they are would have resulted in some improvement by now. Bingo! Anne

osf -> RE: Angry subs. (12/29/2009 11:09:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lusciouslips19 quote: ORIGINAL: osf quote: Pardon my language, but what the fuck are you talking about? Dishonesty about what? I have been perfectly honest each time I reply to one of your silly posts. What would be dishonest is if I agreed with anything you said. when you display them alone as though they were said in a vacuum and give your answer, i'm sorry but that is dishonest Sometimes you make no sense at all. You are rather circular. Red does not talk as though she was in a vacuum. She makes statements in real time with real experience and drawing upon that and what she has observed. What you dont seem to get is the possibility that if things are said to you by subs and experienced doms alike and you dont like the response you come up with a miriad of ways to discount them. The only common denominator in these disagreements is you and your denials of anyone else having validity. let me help you think this through the posts are in a vacuum, ie taken out of context and meaning i'm saying taking posts out of context has no validity if you want to disagree with me, for gods sake disagree with my arguments, don't take my words out of context then disagree with those words is that so hard to understand?

lusciouslips19 -> RE: Angry subs. (12/29/2009 11:09:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Justme696 I will explain when we are alone [:D] OOOOh baby. If I only had wings to fly to those Nether-regions.[:D]

QuirkyAnne -> RE: Angry subs. (12/29/2009 11:13:51 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lizi It's a bad strategy to use in finding your SO to announce what you are NOT looking for and what you DON'T want in strident agressive terms but people do that all the time and then wonder why they don't get anywhere. When you say "strident aggressive terms," do you mean the women who say things like, "Do not even think about contacting me if you are not [insert qualifications here]?" Anne

lusciouslips19 -> RE: Angry subs. (12/29/2009 11:14:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: osf quote: ORIGINAL: lusciouslips19 quote: ORIGINAL: osf quote: Pardon my language, but what the fuck are you talking about? Dishonesty about what? I have been perfectly honest each time I reply to one of your silly posts. What would be dishonest is if I agreed with anything you said. when you display them alone as though they were said in a vacuum and give your answer, i'm sorry but that is dishonest Sometimes you make no sense at all. You are rather circular. Red does not talk as though she was in a vacuum. She makes statements in real time with real experience and drawing upon that and what she has observed. What you dont seem to get is the possibility that if things are said to you by subs and experienced doms alike and you dont like the response you come up with a miriad of ways to discount them. The only common denominator in these disagreements is you and your denials of anyone else having validity. let me help you think this through the posts are in a vacuum, ie taken out of context and meaning i'm saying taking posts out of context has no validity if you want to disagree with me, for gods sake disagree with my arguments, don't take my words out of context then disagree with those words is that so hard to understand? Let me explain this to you. You are incorrect. They are not out of context and you are the only one who thinks so. You seem to not understand anyone and your circular speak and logic has no basis in reality and it makes no sense to anyone but you. Maybe if you got some schooling in philosophy or college classes in logic and contemporary issues, you might understand, Its, If A, then B, therefore C. Not A,B back to A.

sexyred1 -> RE: Angry subs. (12/29/2009 11:15:42 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: osf quote: ORIGINAL: lusciouslips19 quote: ORIGINAL: osf quote: Pardon my language, but what the fuck are you talking about? Dishonesty about what? I have been perfectly honest each time I reply to one of your silly posts. What would be dishonest is if I agreed with anything you said. when you display them alone as though they were said in a vacuum and give your answer, i'm sorry but that is dishonest Sometimes you make no sense at all. You are rather circular. Red does not talk as though she was in a vacuum. She makes statements in real time with real experience and drawing upon that and what she has observed. What you dont seem to get is the possibility that if things are said to you by subs and experienced doms alike and you dont like the response you come up with a miriad of ways to discount them. The only common denominator in these disagreements is you and your denials of anyone else having validity. let me help you think this through the posts are in a vacuum, ie taken out of context and meaning i'm saying taking posts out of context has no validity if you want to disagree with me, for gods sake disagree with my arguments, don't take my words out of context then disagree with those words is that so hard to understand? Wow, you are really out of it, dude. read your words back to Lushy, you are condescending whether or not your posts are in or out of context. She does not need you to help her think, on the contrary, you could learn from her and many others here if you would ever stop and listen. Once again, you disagreed with what someone said and you have no valid response other than to be condescending (or vicious).

happylittlepet -> RE: Angry subs. (12/29/2009 11:15:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: osf quote: ORIGINAL: happylittlepet quote: ORIGINAL: osf go back and take the post in context of the preceding posts i can tolerate your views but i have a problem with your dishonesty Lamest and lowest response you have given so far. Very revealing. people that use quotes out of context are called liars and politicians 1. It's people WHO. 2. People who use the forums like you do are called trolls. 3. [sm=dontfeedtrolls.gif]

osf -> RE: Angry subs. (12/29/2009 11:17:14 AM)
quote: People who use the forums like you do are called trolls. and i'm trolling for?

osf -> RE: Angry subs. (12/29/2009 11:19:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sexyred1 quote: ORIGINAL: osf quote: ORIGINAL: lusciouslips19 quote: ORIGINAL: osf quote: Pardon my language, but what the fuck are you talking about? Dishonesty about what? I have been perfectly honest each time I reply to one of your silly posts. What would be dishonest is if I agreed with anything you said. when you display them alone as though they were said in a vacuum and give your answer, i'm sorry but that is dishonest Sometimes you make no sense at all. You are rather circular. Red does not talk as though she was in a vacuum. She makes statements in real time with real experience and drawing upon that and what she has observed. What you dont seem to get is the possibility that if things are said to you by subs and experienced doms alike and you dont like the response you come up with a miriad of ways to discount them. The only common denominator in these disagreements is you and your denials of anyone else having validity. let me help you think this through the posts are in a vacuum, ie taken out of context and meaning i'm saying taking posts out of context has no validity if you want to disagree with me, for gods sake disagree with my arguments, don't take my words out of context then disagree with those words is that so hard to understand? Wow, you are really out of it, dude. read your words back to Lushy, you are condescending whether or not your posts are in or out of context. She does not need you to help her think, on the contrary, you could learn from her and many others here if you would ever stop and listen. Once again, you disagreed with what someone said and you have no valid response other than to be condescending (or vicious). come on get real her post was a show of support of your post and an indirect attack on me

osf -> RE: Angry subs. (12/29/2009 11:20:57 AM)
how to get subs angry hold views counter to theirs

sexyred1 -> RE: Angry subs. (12/29/2009 11:23:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: osf how to get subs angry hold views counter to theirs Not really, intelligent subs love good debate. But the debate cannot be one sided, which you insist on NOT getting. And no one is angry at you; that would require some invested emotion, of which there is none. It is more about not suffering fools gladly.

osf -> RE: Angry subs. (12/29/2009 11:27:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sexyred1 quote: ORIGINAL: osf how to get subs angry hold views counter to theirs Not really, intelligent subs love good debate. But the debate cannot be one sided, which you insist on NOT getting. And no one is angry at you; that would require some invested emotion, of which there is none. It is more about not suffering fools gladly. but there has been no debate of the argument i would love that

QuirkyAnne -> RE: Angry subs. (12/29/2009 11:27:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: osf and i'm trolling for? For your own amusement. Definition: TROLL: someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community. You have openly admitted to doing this in past posts. Anne

OttersSwim -> RE: Angry subs. (12/29/2009 11:30:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: osf come on get real her post was a show of support of your post and an indirect attack on me Okay, so how about a direct attack on you? Thus far, what we know of you is that you have a keyboard and a goose. You make continuous circular arguments and statements about things that you clearly have very little actual real life experience or understanding of. You post leading statements and use your posts to antagonize other participants. You say you are trying to learn and understand but make it clear that you have no intention of learning or understanding - you are intentionally obtuse. You appear to be here for malice and amusement alone. Your exhibited behavior is well recognized as trolling. You are a troll. Congratulations on keeping so many people going for so long. I am sending a request to the moderators to please look at your posts and behavior and boot your ass out of here.

sexyred1 -> RE: Angry subs. (12/29/2009 11:31:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: osf quote: ORIGINAL: sexyred1 quote: ORIGINAL: osf how to get subs angry hold views counter to theirs Not really, intelligent subs love good debate. But the debate cannot be one sided, which you insist on NOT getting. And no one is angry at you; that would require some invested emotion, of which there is none. It is more about not suffering fools gladly. but there has been no debate of the argument i would love that The debate always gets lost when the OP is unable to get his/her points across in a manner that would foster good debate. And not all debates are arguments, but you seem to want that.

osf -> RE: Angry subs. (12/29/2009 11:33:18 AM)
quote: Definition: TROLL: someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community. and of course none of your posts fit that

Page: << < prev 6 7 [8] 9 10 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875