|
Post by nighttimer on Jul 7, 2019 23:53:46 GMT -5
Yawn. I'm tired of waiting for you to share this "nastygram" with everybody else. Talk is cheap and your trash talk is even cheaper.
Have a good night. Or not.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Jul 7, 2019 23:48:22 GMT -5
When a private message is shared by the perp with two of his fanboys or fangirls, it is, by definition, no longer a private message. Private is one on one. When you bring your audience in to see your brilliant post, all bets are off. So is your analogy.
A "perp" is cop slang for "perpetrator" and as there has been no criminal act occurring here (beyond one individual's rant and raving and disturbing the peace and derailing the thread) and you are no cop. As far as "fanboys" or "fangirls" that's highly dismissive of one female member of this board and of another who no longer posts here on a regular basis.
Plus, your definition is wrong. A private message can be shared as a "CC" (carbon copy to others) or "BCC" (blind carbon copy which can be seen only by those specified recipients, but not the original recipient. At least that's how it is supposed to work). Therefore, I could send a PM to you, haggis and BCC the other 56 members of this board and you wouldn't know it until one of them told you. Probably by a PM.
There is nothing---literally nothing---in this board's rules that state a PM must be shared only with the person it is being sent to and no one else, and why should there be? It should be evident. Just as it should be evident you can't justify the public sharing of that PM. Only one person did that and that was the person who had no business even knowing about it because it wasn't any of her business. So nice try, but you're just going to have to try harder, sir.
And private does not mean "one-on-one." Private means "intended for or restricted to the use of a particular person, group, or class," and not someone who isn't that particular person, part of a specific group and has no class. I'll go with the Merriam-Webster definition over yours, thank you.
It is a reasonable precautionary measure when you are sending a PM that it might be misinterpreted or misread or misunderstood (or exposed by a third party with an axe to grind and no scruples), to protect oneself by sharing it with someone else who can be trusted and can vouch for the message's content. Little could I have known The Rules of The Colline Gate are considered to be null and void when an ex-moderator has an axe to grind and a score to settle.
...and speaking of dull axes to grind and old scores to settle...
I have never been uncomfortable calling someone a racist when they have proven themselves to be a racist, sir. The discomfort occurs for the racist when they are called a racist, because that it not a nice way to be identified. I hope that's clear, but even it is isn't I'm done with that.
I still have your PM's from that time you refer to, and I recall the matter somewhat differently than you. I am not Cassandra so I won't play myself by posting verbatim an irrelevant message from another board that is nearly six years old and which I should have deleted nearly six years ago. All I'll say it was something along the lines of my posts at that other place, not being supportive of old people unless their name was Hank Aaron with the clear inference I was only supportive of old people if they were Black old people.
You almost, but not quite accused me of being racist against White old people like John McCain, but just almost. You didn't come right out and say it. You were very careful that way.
And now here you are, years later and still all full of piss and vinegar over ancient history, but just waiting for the right and strategic moment to dredge up this Mickey Mouse b.s. one more time. Damn, this really IS some high school shit.
I would feel sorry for you holding on that sort of crap for so long, but frankly I don't think enough of you to waste my time to think of it any further. It's just crazy and not worth any more of my time. If holding on to the past so you can drag it into the present does something for you and your unresolved butt-hurt, keep on keepin' on, Haggis. Just know you're no more impartial or neutral or objective than anybody else, so I hope you feel better now that you got it out of your system.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Jul 7, 2019 21:44:57 GMT -5
I think that's ridiculous, and does nothing but protect and empower abusers, trolls, and harassers. ETA: My take: a private dispute with a friend is private (even if it ends the friendship). Private info (in a message board context like this one, that means e.g , real name behind screen names or emails, known only because of friendship) is private. Past confidences made because of then-existing friendship, or any communication where the recipient, regardless of relationship, pledged confidentiality: private. Disclosures made solely because the recipient had a legal duty to keep them confidential: obviously private. But one way screeds-o-hate? Sent to someone who is decidedly not your friend, and indeed sent because you hate them? Not private Especially (but not only) if the sender already dragged in an audience for no apparent reason except so that he has sympathetic listeners for his screed-o-hate. And that's what this was. ETA: I also think if you flounce, you STAY flounced. But if you later regret it and want to rejoin, you don't pretend you never flounced. You acknowledge it and ask to come back. I flounced from another community (though I did so with a short message of goodwill to the community and its mods and no screed of hate, behind the scenes or otherwise, even though I WAS very angry and thought I'd been treated badly). I sometimes miss that community, though I do not plan to go back. But were I to go back, even though I did NOT aim a wall of abuse at the owner or mods, my first step would be a message to the owners telling them I regretted flouncing and asking if I could rejoin. My first post would acknowledge my flounce. And FFS, if some other member made a snide "wait, didn't you flounce," I sure as fuck wouldn't deny it and call them a liar.
Please crawl out of your own rectum for a moment and act as if you have some good common sense, Cassandra, for Christ's sake. You are desperately trying to make black into white, up into down, and sleazy as hell into an act of courageous virtue.
IT. AIN'T. WORKING.
Take a breath and look around you. No one but you and the voices in your head are buying into that bullshit.
Or haven't you noticed how utterly totally completely ALONE you are in this ridiculous "Okay, I did something uncool, but nighttimer made me do it so it's his fault. WAAAAAAHHHH!!!!" line of argument. Until such time as a member of your fan club parachutes in to say "Ditto" you are coming off as totally cray-cray.
Really, what's your point? nighttimer is being mean and caustic and sarcastic and abrasive to me? Okay. I call that Monday, but everything and I do mean EVERYTHING you can say that is foul and wrong about me can be applied just as much to you.
Mean? Check. Caustic? Check. Sarcastic? Check. Abrasive? Check.
If nighttimer hides behind "but the Racism!" to cover for his bad behavior, Cassandra hides behind "but the Sexism!" to cover for her bad behavior. If nighttimer hides behind his race to cover for his bad behavior, Cassandra hides behind her gender to excuse her bad behavior. If nighttimer doesn't belong on this board because he pisses you the fuck off, Cassandra doesn't belong on this board either because she pisses me the fuck off.
I don't flounce, but if I did I wouldn't do it your way. Fuck that shit and fuck it hard. Hell, I don't even want to breathe like you . I don't think like you and I don't do like you and I don't ever want to and I will never-fucking-ever take any lessons or advice from someone who is so clearly in love with their own opinion and contemptuous of any that disagrees with it.
That is why I'd rather be cool with celawson whom I disagree with on so many issues than with a raging egotist and vain narcissist like you, because being in agreement with you makes me feel kinda bad and maybe that I shouldn't be in agreement with such unscrupulous people of such dubious character who shit on The Rules when they get in the way of their selfish and petty tiny little satisfaction.
But here's the best thing about being an asshole is? It's easy to spot another one, and darn if you don't look mighty familiar, Cassandra. Don't delude yourself that you are somehow more principled or dignified or even that your ass belongs on this board more than mine does. You're not better than me. You're not better than anyone.
The problem is with all three of your "What If's" is WHAT IF the fucking screed or tirade of abuse wasn't sent to you in the first fucking place, but you disclosed it anyway because it was disclosed to you, and despite the fact the person(s) it WAS sent to was far more circumspect than you are, you took it on yourself to say, "Aw, fuck it. I'm in my feelings and I hate the guy, so that makes it okay."
That's the problem with "What If" scenarios. They are poor substitutes for "What Did."
For those counting at home, those were eight--count 'em---eight references to me as Cassandra's version of the Anti-Christ. I don't care for the furnishings and the service around this joint sucks, but I do find a small degree of joy knowing I am living rent-free in Cassandra's head.
As for the rest of this messy, self-serving rant, I'll say this about that.
"He's lucky I restrained myself..." (Or what? You're gonna follow me home and beat me up? Shoot me in the back? Call me an 'asshole' to my face? And luck is for rabbits.)
(Hey, if you really want to put the whole PM on the board Cassandra, then why don't you stop threatening to and talking shit that you're going to and JUST FUCKING DO IT. What's stopping you? That fake-ass non-apology apology to robeiae? Don't sweat it. Just write him another one).
(Because if you are waiting for me to beg and plead and fall on my knees for you not to, then you're are seriously delusional and will be waiting a long time. Like the rest of your life).
"...to the extent anyone has a right to be angry at me, it's Rob, not NT..." (If that comes off as smug, elitist, arrogant, and totally clueless entitlement, that's because that is exactly what entitlement looks like. The entitlement of declaring whose grievances are legit and whose are not, because to hear her tell it, the only legitimate criticism of Cassandra can be from the persons Cassandra bestows the right to call her out on her bullshit and nobody else. Fuck. All. That. Noise. And. Fuck. It. Hard).
Cassandra stepped on your foot and did it again even harder. You don't have the right to be angry at her. Cassandra swindled you out of your life savings and rubbed your nose in it. You don't have the right to be angry at her. Cassandra killed your dog and laughed in your face about it? You don't have the right to be angry at her.
(Nobody has to ask for Cassandra's permission for the right to be angry at Cassandra. You take the right).
"...I think Rob knows that my anger at Nighttimer is partially on his (Rob's) behalf..." (Hey, I just realized something. I've crossed swords with robeiae for well over a decade, but it wasn't until right now I realized you were old enough to be his mother and fight his battles for him.
Personally, I think Rob/robieae has proven himself more than capable of fighting his own fights without your help and I bet he can tie his own shoes too.
But you be you.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Jul 7, 2019 15:47:13 GMT -5
Oh goody. It's time for NT to call me a racist. Again. I mean, fine for him to call me, e.g., an aging cheerleader. That's not sexist. But by definition, anything I say to him is racist. He gets to say whatever bullshit he likes, to anyone he likes. But anyone who gets in his face is racist. It's time for NT to call me a racist. Again.
When exactly did I call you a racist? Show the receipts, please, or it didn't happen.
I mean, just because you treat me in a way you treat nobody else and you say things to me you do not say to anyone else and behave in a way toward me in a way you do not behave toward anyone else, does not mean you are a racist.
It means you have one standard in regards to me and another for everyone else who is not me. You liked me then you didn't then you did again and now you don't again. That makes you a little schizoid, but I'm not a doctor, so my opinion can be disregarded on that score.
But racist? Nope. If you were a racist you would have called me something you call nobody else. I certainly gave you the opportunity and the line would have been crossed, but you didn't so hooray. You're not a racist!
Happy now?
Oh, and to the extent I have called you "an aging cheerleader" maybe that's a wee bit sexist or at least sexist-adjacent, but when you are acting like an aging cheerleader, I have no choice but to call things by their correct name.
Which is still less of an insult than "asshole."
And what do you say when your "friends" come to your rescue in a thread they have no interest in? What do you call it when other posters too chickenshit to say what they would like to say to me, "like" your post because you aren't a chickenshit like they are?
What's prozyan's reason for "falling for this shit?" We don't hang out, so why should he have a take on your creepy act that it was wrong? I'd say falling for this shit perfectly encompasses what they are doing and it's about misplaced blind loyalty, not about you being right.
Demonstrating yet again, every bad behavior, every childish taunt, every wild accusation, and every criticism you can levy at ME can be applied equally to YOU.
<Insert chuckle here>
Oh, Cassandra. You really are a legend in your own mind, aren't you? You think by sharing a PM you were not included in is you proving I'm a liar? All you proved is how spiteful you are and how sleazy you are willing to be to try and put me on blast.
When you try to throw feces at others the way the monkeys in the zoo do, you can't do so without getting some on yourself. I'm not the one disclosing PM's. That's you, old pal. That's ALL on you and that half-assed, totally insincere "apology" you offered to robeiae comes a day late and several dollars short. You fucked that up, got called out on it by others not named nighttimer and now the only way you think you can't unfuck yourself is by threatening to release the entire PM?
At the end of the day, it's still robeiae's board and he can make whatever decision he wants to regarding my continued presence here---as well as yours. Because while "proving" I'm a liar is subject to interpretation, calling me an "asshole" is not. Therefore, whatever his decision is, I'm not going to attempt to influence it one way or the other. I leave that sort of shenanigans to you.
Because you had that power and all the authority that came with it and you used it. You enjoyed having that power until you gave it away and now you can't. And that kinda chaps your butt, because if you did, I would not be here now engaging in a pointless, worthless and frankly pretty fucking boring exchange of posts that have zippity-doo-dah to do with the 2020 Presidential Campaign. Mostly because you are kinda petty and hyper-sensitive and easily flummoxed and you want robeiae to do for you what you can't do for yourself.
Que sera, sera. You be you.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Jul 7, 2019 14:11:12 GMT -5
I'm not going to wade into the middle of this, as it seems personal. I just want to add my voice in saying that sharing a private message to the public is pretty shitty. I can't really get behind Rob's reasoning for sharing it with others. There is no need to repeat that the feeling is NT "waived" privacy by CCing others. I understand that is the argument being made. I just don't buy into it. So yeah, in my view no matter how abrasive NT can be....that was a pretty shitty thing to do. My reasoning is different from Rob's. Don't get me wrong -- I agree with Rob's reasoning, but it's secondary for me. I arrive at "fuck NT's message being confidential" even without celawson and Christine. Should you or anyone send me a solid wall of insults via PM, whether or not you cc your buddies, I'll feel free to broadcast it far and wide. If you consult me privately on a question or tell me something in confidence, that is an entirely different matter. I'll keep that quiet forever. If we later have a fight as friends, I'll continue to keep it quiet; the reasonable expectation at the time you sent the message was privacy, and that should be respected. But there was no such reasonable expectation here. NT wasn't consulting Rob as a mod to address an issue on the board, nor was he consulting him (or arguing with him) as a friend. It was a one-way tidal wave of abuse directed at an enemy. It was a mere screed of vitriolic abuse and personal insult, ending in a flounce, after which NT not only had the nerve to come back, but then to deny. (I posted only the conclusion. Frankly, I'm really tempted to post the rest. NT really outdid himself, and that takes some doing.) Seriously, Prozyan , when someone sends you an insult-bomb hate message, you feel some obligation to them? "Oh, gee, they sent it via PM, they only wanted their friends to know they sent me a page of insults, so I guess I gotta keep it confidential." Yeah, fuck that noise -- whether or not they cc their buddies. Nighttimer can fuck right off. I will never forgive him or exchange a civil word with him again after that message. He should have stayed flounced and I truly don't understand why Rob hasn't banned his miserable ass. WTF is confidential about a screed of insult? Regardless of whether NT sent it by PM, email, text message, fed-ex, snail mail, voicemail, smoke signal, telegraph, or slid a note under the door, a message that contains nothing but abuse for the recipient does not leave ANY obligation in the recipient. Hate mail is private? That's nonsense, IMO. Hate mail is a form of harassment. I'll be damn if I can see why Rob should just sit back and be a private punching bag for NT -- especially when NT brought an audience for himself. Fuck. That. Noise. ETA: So, Prozyan. If I send you a PM cc'ing Angie and Rob that is a mere tirade of abuse and insult, is your thought "gee, Cass sent this by PM, so obviously she wanted it kept between me and her two buddies. I guess I can't tell Opty and Vince about it. It's private." Yeah, no, I doubt it. If Vince were to send Angie sexually suggestive stuff via PM, cc'ng you and Opty, does Angie have an obligation to keep it quiet because you sent it via PM? Fuck, no. A PM has the same privacy expectations as a letter, email, text, DM on Twitter, or really, any conversation between 2 people (much less 4 people) that doesn't come with a professional obligation of confidentiality (lawyer, doctor, priest)* or some promise of confidentiality (as between friends). There's nothing magic about a PM. Any obligation of confidentiality depends on circumstances. -- the relationship between the people, the content of the message, the audience. Here, we had pure hate mail, and hate mail that moreover included the sender's chosen audience for no other purpose than to be an audience. Sorry, no expectation or obligation of privacy there. Hate trolls have no expectation of privacy. *BTW, even with such professional obligations, there isn't a blanket "I said it to a lawyer, so it's therefore sacred and untouchable." E.g., the lawyer has to be YOUR lawyer--he has to have accepted that obligation. But even if he is your lawyer, by the way, not everything you say to him is privileged. E.g., if you email him about a problem and cc two random people who aren't essential to the communication, just for funsies, you've waived the lawyer/client privilege with regard to that message. Yeah. Anyway. Even if you consider Rob to have some kind of sacred obligation as a mod to be a punching bag (and why, exactly?) I'll be damned if I can see how it holds when NT decides to bring two people who haven't even posted here for months into the "private" conversation. ETA: Moreover, NT triply forfeited any "confidentiality" expectation when he fucking lied. He flounced--there can be no dispute. I was contenting myself with a jab that everyone who hadn't seen his message might well have taken as a joke. NT could have ignored it. Or he could have owned it "yes, I did say I was flouncing, though I'd intended that to be private, but now I've changed my mind." Had he done either, I wouldn't have posted that snippet--there'd be no reason. But he and his fucking ego couldn't leave it alone. No, he had to accuse me of lying about it and blast out his signature brand of Trumpish vitriol accusing me of being a liar, etc. At that point, fuck yeah, I'm going to prove he's a liar. At that point, it's self-defense. (That's why I posted only the relevant portion rather than the entire hateful screed--it was sufficient to make my point.) It was ridiculous of him to deny it, and outrageous that he accused me of lying. (This is a completely independent ground, I think, for disclosing a private communication. You don't get to lie about something and get a free pass because you did that something "privately", IMO.) A rule of "confidentiality" that merely allows a troll to harass and spew abuse, share it with his friends, and then deny he ever sent it, accusing others of lying -- wtf. That's not a thing, nor should it be. That would serve only to protect trolls and harassers. I believe the only reason this particular message was sent privately at all was because NT knew he'd look like an utter asshole if anyone other than his friends saw it, and even as he flounced, he wanted to be able to later pretend he didn't--to come right back firing his usual bullshit abuse as though it had never happened. He wanted all the satisfaction of being a flouncing troll with none of the consequences. That's just ridiculous. Anything I could add after this would be superfluous. Yeah, I do. And I'm here for it and not all this mundane and trivial garbage where you don't like me and I don't like you and we have nothing else in common. Fuck all that. It's a tedious, tiresome and needless derail, but when you have both the Powers That Be and the Former Powers That Be doing the derailing, what else can you do but hope they finally give up on the personal and petty B.S. and get back to the topic.
Now if only everyone else were instead of all this Mickey Mouse high school bullshit just maybe we could get back to discussing the goddamned 2020 election instead of all this weak-ass personal crap.
You're not here for discussions. You came because you hated Rob and Amadan and weren't allowed to abuse them like that in another forum. I realized that too late, and I deeply regret inviting you here. You would have been banned a thousand times over at AW if you'd behaved as you did here, and I think you should have been banned here, since you've thoroughly violated the rules a thousand times. Don't even pretend you want to discuss things. You came to be a wrecking ball. Mea culpa. I should have seen it sooner than I did. I do owe an apology to one person here, and that's robeiae . (He doesn't owe an apology to anyone in this scenario.) I didn't ask him about posting that snippet, and perhaps I should have done so. While I absolutely give the pfft to any notion of that hateful screed entitling NT to anything from Rob or anyone, Rob is another matter. My apologies, Rob. My excuse is this: the screed also insulted me, I took some personal affront to it as well as offense on your behalf, and when NT lied and, to add insult to injury, accused me of lying, I lost my temper. (And, well, that's been building for a while. We've both taken a lot of abuse, public and private, from NT.) I felt the need to defend myself. You did not ask me to keep it confidential. Still, as a friend, I think I should have asked you, and I'm sincerely sorry. But to NT. Pfft. No. Sorry. This "aging cheerleader" does not owe an apology to NT, and neither does Rob. Your hatred is strong. Much stronger than your reasoning.
You are a very angry person and you are a narcissist who postures as being oh-so-sophisticated and worldly-wise, yet just below the surface you are a fountain of rage and resentment. You take shit personally that personally is none of your business.
Your rationalizations for posting a message are indefensible. If anyone here has made a strong case for being banned, I'd say you've made it with all your "fuck you's" and "assholes" and other slurs.
robeiae has not banned me from the board not because I haven't done anything worth being banned for, but quite possibly because he said he wasn't going to and he was going to moderate the board with a lighter touch. I'm fairly certain he wasn't expecting it would turn into the Wild West with "fuck you!" flying around like bullets, but c'est la vie. All I can say let she who is without sin cast the first stone.
Because as far as The Rules go, let the person issuing the "fuck you" join the person who responds, "no--fuck you" on the outside looking in.
Because if The Rules are how decisions are made to suspend or ban someone then I'm not the only one deserving of that sanction.
Because as far as The Rules go, you've taken a giant dump on more than a few of them.
Now it seems as though you're not quite as down for following The Rules. Is it because when you quit on robeiae as a Moderator and became just another schmuck on this board, you had carved out a special exemption for yourself where The Rules no longer applied or only when you felt like following The Rules?
You say, "Frankly, I'm really tempted to post the rest. NT really outdid himself, and that takes some doing."
I say, do whatever blows your hair back. If you believe making me look bad will make you look good, go for it. There's nothing between you but air and opportunity. Knock yourself out.
You say, "Nighttimer can fuck right off. I will never forgive him or exchange a civil word with him again after that message."
I say, I do not care. I do not need your forgiveness and would never ask for it. Nor is it necessary to exchange a civil word with me again after that message or before that message. My world will go on quite nicely without any comment from you ever again.
You say, "He should have stayed flounced and I truly don't understand why Rob hasn't banned his miserable ass."
I say, if you change the pronoun from "he/him" to "she/her" the exact same thing applies to you.
You say, "Moreover, NT triply forfeited any "confidentiality" expectation when he fucking lied. He flounced--there can be no dispute. I was contenting myself with a jab that everyone who hadn't seen his message might well have taken as a joke. NT could have ignored it. Or he could have owned it "yes, I did say I was flouncing, though I'd intended that to be private, but now I've changed my mind." Had he done either, I wouldn't have posted that snippet--there'd be no reason. But he and his fucking ego couldn't leave it alone. No, he had to accuse me of lying about it and blast out his signature brand of Trumpish vitriol accusing me of being a liar, etc. At that point, fuck yeah, I'm going to prove he's a liar. At that point, it's self-defense. (That's why I posted only the relevant portion rather than the entire hateful screed--it was sufficient to make my point.) It was ridiculous of him to deny it, and outrageous that he accused me of lying. (This is a completely independent ground, I think, for disclosing a private communication. You don't get to lie about something and get a free pass because you did that something "privately", IMO.)"
I say, it's interesting to be called a liar by someone who does it so effortlessly and naturally as breathing. Perhaps it's your own Trumpish quirk where everyone else is at fault but you're as pure as the driven snow. Vince interprets your post in a way you are annoyed by? Vince is mansplaining. celawson takes a position in support of Trump? Oh, she's gonna get spanked for that. NT is not playing nice with me in a thread? Well, first I'm going to make a public declaration that I'm putting him on Ignore and there he shall stay until he's not and then my bae will show up in a thread she's never posted in ever immediately after NT mentions her name.
Lied? Lying? Liar? Lie? From you? Of all people? You might want to find another angle of attack because as far as who's better and who's best at deceit, manipulation, falsehood, and deception, I'm merely a talented amateur at something you take professional pride in.
One is us is coming off as if they are having an emotional break and clue---it's you.
Maybe you need to calm down. Have some tea.
Since you obviously don't feel like The Rules no longer apply or at least don't apply to you, why don't you stop with all the foreplay and get around to calling me what you REALLY want to call me, Cassandra? It will make you feel so much better. You've shredded so many other rules and principles and traditions and common standards of simple decency, so what's one more?
There's the line. It's the last line. Cross it. Don't wuss out now.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Jul 6, 2019 21:26:59 GMT -5
I'm not going to wade into the middle of this, as it seems personal. I just want to add my voice in saying that sharing a private message to the public is pretty shitty. I can't really get behind Rob's reasoning for sharing it with others. There is no need to repeat that the feeling is NT "waived" privacy by CCing others. I understand that is the argument being made. I just don't buy into it. So yeah, in my view no matter how abrasive NT can be....that was a pretty shitty thing to do. Anything I could add after this would be superfluous. Hey guys.... remembNer when we were discussing the election in this thread? Yeah, I do. And I'm here for it and not all this mundane and trivial garbage where you don't like me and I don't like you and we have nothing else in common. Fuck all that. It's a tedious, tiresome and needless derail, but when you have both the Powers That Be and the Former Powers That Be doing the derailing, what else can you do but hope they finally give up on the personal and petty B.S. and get back to the topic.
Now if only everyone else were instead of all this Mickey Mouse high school bullshit just maybe we could get back to discussing the goddamned 2020 election instead of all this weak-ass personal crap.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Jul 6, 2019 20:22:43 GMT -5
So why are you here? Exchange emails with celawson, be true to your flounce, and escape all of us unworthy lightweights who fail to appreciate you. Hell, you have a whole 'nother board where apparently they appreciate your magnificence. As far as I know, celawson hasn't been banned over there. You can go romp there among the righteous. Why come here with all of us bad, rotten, no good, unworthy lightweights, after you took all that effort to write a flounce? Seems a pity to waste it, not to mention all your precious posting time here casting your pearls before swine. Here's the thing, Cassandra. I have not been banned from The Colline Gate and until such time as I am, all your agitating for a different result is based upon your own wine-fueled fantasies and hateful spitefulness and pettiness.
You can shit all over the previous board you were on until you permaflounced. Nobody cares. What is quite significant to you is quite insignificant to everyone else. Nobody else but you even gives a damn.
What makes you such a bad, rotten, unworthy lightweight is you are all too eager to sell out your supposed principles and high-minded rhetoric if you have even the slightest chance of taking a shot at someone who dares to call you out on your b.s.
I come here for one reason. I was invited to. And I don't owe you any more motherfucking explanation than that. I have no illusions I occupy the same prominence here you do. However, until such time as I commit a more egregious violation of this board than you have, I'm here and if that bugs you, oh fucking well. Cry me a river.
Or if you prefer since you have taken me off of Ignore, I can send you a personal message which you can then share on the whole board for everybody else to share in the fun.
Never stop being you.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Jul 6, 2019 19:25:26 GMT -5
But disclosing a private message that wasn't even sent to her has to win the prize for nasty. And that's on who shared it AND who posted it. Really unfortunate. Let me be real clear here, both with regard to what transpired and what I see as the "etiquette" of the situation: After I locked the Stoneman Douglas thread, nighttimer did indeed send me a private message, in which he let me know what he thought of me--in no uncertain terms--and declared that he would no longer be a member of this messageboard. I honestly thought that would be the last I would see of him here. But I didn't ban him, so there's nothing preventing him from coming back. And--of course--he did come back. Still, what he did do--when he sent me that message--was flounce, most assuredly. And here's the kicker: when he sent that message, he copied other people in on it, including YOU, people who had nothing to do with the argument that shut down the Stoneman Douglas thread, nothing to do with nighttimer's beef with me (I think he just wanted an audience to see him stick it to me). As far as I'm concerned, when he did that, he surrendered any right to privacy re the contents of that message. And that's exactly what I told Cass and Angie when I shared nighttimer's message with them (because I thought they would enjoy the flounce). Don't like it? Too bad. Again, nighttimer doesn't get to rant at me, share it with you and others, then complain when I share it with people, as well. Neither do you. Point.
Counterpoint.
Simple fact. Simple truth: The Colline Gate is your board, robeiae which you can run any way you so choose to. It's not as though there's anyone you have to be accountable to than yourself.
I could not disagree more with your interpretation of the events and I find your "justification" of sharing a PM with members not included because they had already blocked me, to be self-serving and somewhat disturbing in your casual admission that ANY PM you receive is subject to being shared with others based upon nothing but than a personal whim. Any board where there is not even the most basic adherence to the principle the communications between members and administrations are not for public consumption is a board that deserves to shrivel and die.
I am not the one who shared a PM with the small audience of this board. Cassandra, a supposed attorney did, and robeiae gave it his blessing to the public sharing of message to someone who it was NOT carbon copied to. Christine and celawson are friends of mine. Angie and Cassandra are not. If you possessed even the slightest semblance of fairness the treatment of the private communications of Members between Administrators would be strictly off-limits for public consumption and that includes sharing it with an ex-Moderator and her sidekick.
This isn't the first time someone has wondered if PM's between members here can be read by moderators and administrators. I'm reasonably certain that is not the case, but it should be a chilling notice to everyone on The Colline Gate that a PM can be shared with others just for shit and giggles. That's really sleazy and there's no better word to describe such an act.
That said, I do owe a debt to, robeiae and it is high time I acknowledged it. Had it not been for this board, warts and all, I would have never had the opportunity to communicate with celawson and Christine, on a one-on-one basis, and if for nothing more than than that, I would still express my gratitude to you.
Previously, I had considered celawson to be just another no-knowing, no-thinking Forever Trump Zombie who parroted every line from him and really believed any criticism was coming from far left/socialist snowflakes and an overtly biased, lame stream media peddling fake news about Trump because they hated everything he stood for.
But it wasn't until I encountered her again here that I had the opportunity to dig a little deeper, think a bit more critically, and allow the other side of the argument to be seen as complex individuals like myself instead of cookie-cutter cartoons of Republican and conservative doggerel. The unhappy truth is that while the Left doesn't have an equivalent to Rush Limbaugh, National Review, Fox News, Roger Ailes, or Ann Coulter, we are just as programmed and being force-fed positions, beliefs, opinions and thoughts that are not entirely of our own.
celawson has been a great comfort to me on a personal matter that has left me beaten, broken and scarred. My entire family has spent far too much goddamn time in emergency rooms, hospitals and rehabilitation centers. If not for her advice, suggestions, observations and just fucking listening to me in a particularly low moment, I might have self-medicated myself into total obliviousness. Because my family is going through some extremely heavy shit with someone very near and dear to me and in her non-Colline Gate real life as someone who knows a lot about strokes, celawson has helped me in times when I have been confused, depressed and at my lowest depths. Now despite celawson have nothing in common politically with me, I have come to know her ia decent, kind, thoughtful, intelligent person and loving person. Yes, she is a Republican and a die-hard conservative and over the years here and elsewhere, I have given her even more hell than Cassandra, and that takes some doing!
I do not understand why she supports Donald Trump while I support Joe Biden and any other Democrat in 2020 to beat him, but our commonalities about family, country and the future overshadow our political and philosophical differences.
It's funny. In terms of political leanings I should be more in line with Cassandra and even Optimus than celawson, but it didn't shake out that way. There was a window of opportunity where it was possible to forge a working relationship with self-declared "liberals" who were on different stage on The Leftism Scale. That window has closed now, so I give zero fucks what Cassandra or Optimus have to say about me or much of anything else. I can only be offended by someone I respect and I respect an authentic conservative than I do phony-ass "liberals" who believe it is their God-given right to define what the agenda should be for everybody else.
Fuck that shit and fuck it hard. I do not accept the whiny and sanctimonious rants of hypocrites .
celawson has never called me an "asshole" though I'm pretty sure it has run through her mind more than once, "Ooooh--nighttimer is SUCH an asshole!" It is almost funny how the openly conservative of this board has demonstrated more civility and simple class and decency to me than the supposed "moderate-to-liberal" contingent has. How does that work exactly? Oh yeah, that's right. celawson assumes good intentions until proven otherwise. She should possibly consider creating a TED talk on how to debate with people who hate your stinkin' guts and yet retain a sense of comity and respect despite it all.
Or maybe celawson is excoriated, rebuked and scorned for holding a heretic for keeping the faith to her beliefs and that's why she is so often treated as an aberrant abnormality in The Colline Gate as much as I am for being unapologetically authentic for thinking Black first, talking Black first, defending Black first and being Black first with no apologies provided and no explanations of why this is so.
Cassandra and Optimus can try to put me on blast, but they could not be more unprepared and unqualified for the job. They are little more than yet another pair of fake-ass "liberals" who are legends in their own tiny minds and labor under the same delusion that Joe Biden that he is insulated and immune from being critiqued on their racial statements and deeds. What they do not and can not wrap their tiny little brain stems around is Democrats are only as useful to Black people as their willingness to share power with their most supportive, loyal and consistent base and no, it is NOT some goddamned soccer mom in Kansas or coal miner in West Virginia.
That's not going to happen without a big fight and that's why Joe Biden is being sold as not his first term but Barack Obama's third.
It is also why if I had to bet for or against a second term for Donald John Trump in July 2020, with a surging economy, unemployment down, and no major war besides the never-ending farce in Afghanistan, the odds are decidedly in his favor for winning a second term.
That is when the fun will really begin.
But if it's more fun to fuck with me because Cassandra is sporting a lady boner, PLEASE continue with trying to defend the egregious exposure of a personal communication for the pettiest of petty-ass reasons.
It's transparent, it's indefensible and it's slimy, but at least everybody knows what time it is. Finally.
Kamwe usiacha kuwa wewe.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Jul 6, 2019 1:08:27 GMT -5
Flounce?
I don't do flounce.
I leave that sort of weak shit to the legends in their own mind who do that when called out on their weak shit one time too many and lacking anything remotely resembling a reasoned, logical, critically thought-out, intelligent response instead fall back on one-liners and projections of their own behavior, because really what the heck else do they have to contribute but some weak shit point of view minus facts, sources or corroboration who will react poorly whenever that is pointed out to them.
Mext, they seemingly develop a hankering for the gig they used to have before they gave it up because they were having a hissy fit and willingly gave up Mjölnir, Ban Hammer of the Gods.
So, so sorry but not really, if I'm unfamiliar with this "flounce" type thang you speak of. Is it a White thing or am I playing Opty's played out race card?
I do clapback. You be you. Huh. See, when you said this: I took it as a flounce. You even signed and dated it, to make it extra official. Of course, it was way, way, way, WAY longer than that and as nasty as fuck, you being you. But looking at that little snippet, seems to me it's hard to see how else one could read that than as a flounce, hmmm? But hey, I'm a mere...how did you put it? my eyes glazed over halfway through your flounce...Oh yeah, I'm a mere "aging cheerleader," not a valiant martyr like you. So what do I know? I could post the whole thing so everyone could judge for themselves whether it was a flounce. But I think that's enough to show that just like Trump, you lie. I gave it a 4/10, btw.
BTW, I call bullshit.
Being called a liar by a professional one is but praise from Satan. Clean up your own backyard before you start talking mad shit about mine, because when it comes to be a liar, I'm at best a hopeful amateur at something you are a skilled master at.
But first things first! You took me off of Ignore? Oh, Cassandra! My heart is singing a song of unbridled joy! The Queen of The Colline Gate has deemed me worthy of her notice! Goody-goodie gumdrops! Did yo' mama call you "sugar" because you are SO sweet!
The thing is when I sent that PM it was addressed to three specific individuals and YOU were not one of them. Now it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out HOW exactly a message nor sent to you got to you, but then again, I put nothing past you in your manipulations and unscrupulous attempts to claim a morally superior high ground you do not occupy.
You publicly proclaim you put me on IGNORE, so how could you receive a message not sent to you? It should have been blocked into limbo, but what you have demonstrated is you are not the principled Legal Eagle you present yourself as. Not when you are willing to divulge a Private Message that wasn't directed to you for public consumption.
On the other hand it is important to you to find a reason for Opty, Angie or other members of your fan club to "like" your posts. It's a bit sad and pathetic, but you do deserve some credit since you have established you have you have the balls Opty lacks to actually engage. How low you will go in your highly personalized attacks and red-faced anger simply because of the sick burn Kamala Harris laid on Joe Biden's decrepit ass? The mind positively reels at the possibilities....
I do appreciate your sharing the PM with whomever bothers to read it. It's good to know when the cards are being shuffled, whom exactly it is dealing from the bottom of the deck. It's even better to know as a former journalist my principles of privacy and confidentiality remain more discreet and respectful of private communications than a practicing attorney.
As a former Moderator, the expectation is you would TRY to rise to a higher standard and engage in a "thoughtful political discussion" instead of personal attacks, but that's not your thing. It never has been. You prefer the adoration of your pseudo "liberal" serfs than the deconstruction of your flimsy opinions by someone who knows how to call you on it. Then again you've always been more about admiration and affirmation from your slobbering fanboys and girls flattering your ego than you ever were about actually having the intestinal fortitude to defend your own positions.
Here's the thing: if I HAD sent that to message to you in a PM and you turned around decided to disclose a private message in a public forum, I'm looking less like the asshole than you do.
Anything that is "nasty as fuck" would only be addressing you on a level upon which you are most comfortable with. One does not have to go very far back in the history of this board (or any prior one) to find numerous examples of you being "nasty as fuck" to celawson, Christine, and anyone else with who no longer post on this board on a regular basis, but had the temerity to call you out on your bullshit . Skip the sanctimonious crap. It's not a good fit.
If we're going to play true confessions and start disclosing private messages in a public setting, I have a few where you and I were planning to meet for a friendly drink a few years ago during my last trip to NYC , only for it to go swirling down the crapper after we disagreed over an NYC terror attack on a bike trail. I recall that quite vividly, but unlike you, I have enough character to not share a private communication in a public forum just to score points.
So, good luck to Biden. When this month's debate rolls around, he can only go up from his previous shit-the-bed performance. I suspect Harris won't be the only candidate to call Biden out.
In the meantime, you be you, Cassandra and continue trusting in the absolute rightness of your morally superior positions and opinions no matter how wrong they are.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Jul 5, 2019 21:15:10 GMT -5
Wait, didn't you flounce? Flounce?
I don't do flounce.
I leave that sort of weak shit to the legends in their own mind who do that when called out on their weak shit one time too many and lacking anything remotely resembling a reasoned, logical, critically thought-out, intelligent response instead fall back on one-liners and projections of their own behavior, because really what the heck else do they have to contribute but some weak shit point of view minus facts, sources or corroboration who will react poorly whenever that is pointed out to them.
Mext, they seemingly develop a hankering for the gig they used to have before they gave it up because they were having a hissy fit and willingly gave up Mjölnir, Ban Hammer of the Gods.
So, so sorry but not really, if I'm unfamiliar with this "flounce" type thang you speak of. Is it a White thing or am I playing Opty's played out race card?
I do clapback.
You be you.
It's like...I dunno... weird.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Jul 5, 2019 14:59:38 GMT -5
So, apparently for all her bluster the other night, Harris is actually a hypocrite when it comes to busing: apnews.com/586b1e81cb684654b0cf689b9074c1cbIf she didn't have my vote before, she sure as fuck doesn't have it now. Kamala Harris vaulted from the middle of the pack to right behind Joe Biden's heels, so apparently she sure as fuck doesn't need your vote now. Is that right, though? My understanding of Biden's position was that he thought the federal govt should leave it to local school districts and state govts to make decisions on busing. Harris seems to be saying the same, but for the fed govt to step in if necessary. Local first, federal second. Am I wrong on that? Entirely possible, but if not I don't think she's being inconsistent. His position, as I understand it, was that he was against federally mandated busing because he believed at the time that the school boards should choose how best to proceed. He didn't want to take the power away from the local school districts to make their own decisions. While in today's context I would definitely disagree with that position, given the cultural thinking at the time ( where nearly 50% of black Americans were AGAINST mandated busing), I can't necessarily fault him for voting against something (within that historical context and zeitgeist) that nearly half of the people it would affect didn't actually want. Her response seems like intentionally vague and slippery doublespeak in that she's saying that federally mandated busing should be a "tool in the toolbox" but that whether it is used should be left up to the school boards (Harris: "I believe that any tool that is in the toolbox should be considered by a school district"). In other words, according to her, busing shouldn't be mandated, it should be "considered." Which is indistinct from Biden's given reason for voting against federally mandated busing. Her bullshit response suggests that she either doesn't understand what "federally mandated" means (which I seriously doubt) or her attack on Biden was as disingenuous as it was pre-planned and when put on the spot, she has to resort to speaking out of both sides of her ass to weasel out of clearly/directly answering the question.
From the previously quoted AP article:
Yeah, that's kind of messy for Good Ol' Joe.
There's so much wrong in that bold print.
First off, it's Opty's insistence anyone who agreed with Kamala Harris is a "low-information voter" which is just a nice way to say they are uneducated and stupid voters. Which is patently untrue as I agreed with Kamala Harris and am neither uneducated or stupid. If anything, I am a high-information voter. I just don't strut around bragging about it like it makes me a big fucking deal or something.
Now about that now antiquated phrase "playing the race card..."
So it is playing the race card when a Black woman nails Biden for his slurping of two dead segregationist assholes. It is playing the race card when a Black woman smacks Biden around for opposing federally mandated busing because not every community was willing to do it voluntarily.
But it's not playing the race card when Biden gets owned by a Black woman and his defenders rush to proclaim since he was Barack Obama's veep for eight years he can't possibly have any bigoted thoughts.
Okay. That might just fly. If you could only forget about how worthless Biden was in opposing Clarence Thomas and how shitty he treated Anita Hill and how he refused to allow other women who wanted to speak to the Senate Judiciary Committee on how Thomas had sexually harassed them.
What does "liberal racism" look like? It looks a lot like Joe Biden's tenure in the Senate.
When it comes to playing the race card and not merely to get some cheap applause, Biden has done more of his fair share of dealing for the bottom of deck while making life harder for countless numbers of Black Americans. That's the kind of playing of the race card with far more harmful results and a long-term detrimental and crippling effect on a group of Americans who were deliberately excluded from this nation's Constitutional protections and rights. Go read some Frederick Douglass, "What To the Slave is the Fourth of July" if you can't figure that part out for yourself.
Now I understand why Biden is the Great White Hope of Democratic moderates. They believe he is the guy who can win back states like Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Ohio and woo White voters back to the Democrats. The problem is there aren't enough White voters to take from Trump to get Biden elected because t he majority of White voters don't vote for Democratic presidential candidates and haven't for decades.
Therefore, when a so-called "liberal" like Opty says he sure as fuck isn't voting for Kamala Harris, the proper response from Harris should be, "I wasn't counting on you anyway, boo."
The "low information voters" of The Colline Gate preen and posture about their vast intellectual superiority over the unthinking masses, yet time and again are no more in possession of the facts than they are.
The key difference between the two is only one group of low-information voters has an online sounding board to demonstrate their ignorance.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Jul 1, 2019 19:55:05 GMT -5
I agree with nighttimer that attacking Joe Biden is not only fair, it's how it's supposed to work. I don't want him as my nom, I'd prefer Harris right now. But for sure Biden has no claim to the position, and I don't think the other candidates have any duty to rally around him just because he's the front-runner (right now). The central theme of Cass's argument is that since right now Biden is in the best position to beat Trump, nothing else matters and Biden, therefore, should be the nominee. She's fine with other people running as long as they don't do any damage to Biden. If another candidate like Harris or Warren manages to usurp Biden than once again the other candidates have a duty to do no harm to the front runner lest they are in a weaker position to defeat Trump. However, that's never been how politics work, nor should it from here. I don't want to be told I'm stuck with Biden or Trump this far out. I'm rather unsure of who, if any on the D side I'll support in the general. I know I won't cast a vote for Trump unless the nomination went to someone worse than Trump on the D side, and that's not about to happen. My opinion might change if I would move to a swing state before the election, but I don't see that happening. Therefore, a 3rd party candidate is viable for me. (That doesn't mean I plan on voting for a 3rd party at this juncture.) There are a few peeps on the D side I'm open to. Gee, thanks for mansplaining my position, Vince. But you don't actually have it right. Actually, Vince has it exactly right and dismissing his critique of your position isn't "mansplaining." That's you trying to shut down a point of view you disagree with. Vince is the quintessential swing voter. Not so conservative as to automatically link arm with the Always Trump Republicans as they jump off the cliff, but not so liberal as to throw his support behind just any Democrat who moseys along claiming to be able to beat Trump.
For all your claims of how the Democrats stand no chance if they alienate independent voters, Vince is that guy and backhanding his viewpoint away because it differs from your own is how you push guys like him away from the Dems and into the waiting open arms of the Repubs.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Jul 1, 2019 18:21:21 GMT -5
Editorial cartoonist Michael deAdder saw this picture...
...and made this illustration...
...and then he was fired...This is a dangerous time for refugees. And for satire. And the truth.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Jul 1, 2019 7:15:04 GMT -5
Apparently an overt nod to ageism by a young White dude earns not even a mention round these parts while two Black senators calling out Biden's praise of dead bigots incites pushback and outage. Outrage? Lol, sure. And I don't see anyone pushing back on Harris. She scored big points at the debate by going after Biden. Good for her, well played. Perhaps you are reading a different thread, because in this one there certainly is far more pushback against Harris' on-point bitch-slap of Biden than Swalwell's snide crack that Uncle Joe needed to get off the stage and let the youngsters play.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Jul 1, 2019 7:07:09 GMT -5
Biden is leading in the polls. He will be attacked by the other candidates. That's politics 101. If he can't survive it, he won't survive Trump. This is one of the issues with a primary like this. Each of the contenders bloody each other. Whoever wins gets to limp away and face the other side. Since as of now there doesn't appear to be any real challengers to Trump, it'll be the giant Cheeto himself. This would be the same if the last election Rubio, or Cruz or Bush number 3 had won the primary and then the election. The difference here is that nobody has as many negatives as Trump. That doesn't mean beating him is a sure thing. It was supposed to be a sure thing for Hillary, but it didn't work out. The incompetence of Clinton's campaign (ignoring Wisconsin and Pennsylvania despite pleas that they were taking on water in two key states Obama had won) and the meddling of the Russians may have had something to do with that.
The next round of debates will be in late July where Biden will have a chance to rebound from a miserable performance last week. It was reminiscent of how a listless and disinterested Barack Obama was trounced by Mitt Romney in their first debate in 2012. Romney rose as Obama stumbled, but the ultimate result vindicated him. Biden will be better the next time because he will have to be. A first faceplant will not end Uncle Joe's third try for The Big Chair.
A second one might.
|
|