@kilroy70 saidI haven't "mangled" anything or misrepresented the clear meaning of your words. As you say, it's still "in full view of everyone".
And when it gets right down to it, you can't even be trusted with relatively innocuous statements... you're able to mangle nearly anything said, and in full view of everyone.
There is nothing in my posting history to suggest that I might exploit "misfortune" in your life, such as you having had relatives pass away, in order to declare it "forum gold".
There was nothing whatsoever "innocuous" about your posting starting at the top of page 32.
@fmf saidPlaying the same stupid victim card over and over won't work. You sound like a man trying to squelch his own guilty conscience.
I haven't "mangled" anything or misrepresented the clear meaning of your words. As you say, it's still "in full view of everyone".
There is nothing in my posting history to suggest that I might exploit "misfortune" in your life, such as you having had relatives pass away, in order to declare it "forum gold".
There was nothing whatsoever "innocuous" about your posting starting at the top of page 32.
It's all just good wholesome fun and jocular forum banter when you are on the attack, isn't it. But heaven forbid if someone comes after you, then it's unjustifiable insinuations.
@kilroy70 saidAs I say, your insinuation that I might troll you about your relatives having died - and now also trying to insinuate that I have a "guilty conscience" - is wholly unjustified and does not constitute "fun and jocular forum banter" at all. Indeed, it's a pretty nasty brand of gaslighting.
Playing the same stupid victim card over and over won't work. You sound like a man trying to squelch his own guilty conscience.
It's all just good wholesome fun and jocular forum banter when you are on the attack, isn't it. But heaven forbid if someone comes after you, then it's unjustifiable insinuations.
@fmf said"The references to Suzianne's reappearance have been frivolous and jocular."
The references to Suzianne's reappearance have been frivolous and jocular. With your stuff insinuating that I might troll you about deceased relatives, you don't seem jocular at all. Indeed, your banter seems pretty unpleasant.
You're able to call them frivolous and jocular because you were not the target.
@kilroy70 saidI am able to call them frivolous and jocular because that's what they simply are. This thread is about how she has gone for good. I posted about how she obviously hasn't.
"The references to Suzianne's reappearance have been frivolous and jocular."
You're able to call them frivolous and jocular because you were not the target.
