@ghost-of-a-duke said"He"?
As is the Ben Affleck account.
I rant about him being a terrible actor and he then pops up on the site. Funny stuff.
You thought it was funny because you thought he was really Ben Affleck?
@ghost-of-a-duke saidAnd on the strength of those "sources" you make accusations about things that happened 14 years ago?
I have my sources...
And you do this in spite of the admiration for me you expressed in 2017, 2018, 2019 and 2020?
@ghost-of-a-duke saidNot in the slightest
You seem a little rattled?
You've been posting from the Romans1009 playbook 2018 for the last few pages. It's not the kind of thing that gets me rattled.
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 29899
@fmf saidI've simply highlighted the absurdity of your position.
Not in the slightest
You've been posting from the Romans1009 playbook 2018 for the last few pages. It's not the kind of thing that gets me rattled.
The William Booth account was no different than the Ben Affleck account, just not as funny.
@ghost-of-a-duke saidI never used two accounts at the same time. It's absurd to claim It's "no different" than Ben Affleck who used two accounts on this forum yesterday.
I've simply highlighted the absurdity of your position.
The William Booth account was no different than the Ben Affleck account, just not as funny.
358d
@ghost-of-a-duke saidWhat makes you claim that what happened 14 years ago, 6 years before you arrived here, was "just not as funny" as someone using Ben Affleck as a username?
I've simply highlighted the absurdity of your position.
The William Booth account was no different than the Ben Affleck account, just not as funny.
358d
@ghost-of-a-duke saidI never used two accounts at the same time. Whoever owns the Ben Affleck username did exactly this yesterday.
You created multiple accounts. Stop splitting hairs.
@ghost-of-a-duke saidWhat interests me about the Ben Affleck username [is it STILL very funny, btw?] Is whether it is used for thumbing.
@FMF
You've not fared well in this thread, coming off a bit hypercritical.
- Joined
- 14 Jan 19
- Moves
- 4282
@ghost-of-a-duke saidBelief in belief?
I don't believe you.
I second that emotion. Double disbelief! Do we believe in belief itself?
Can we be certain that our resident comedian and king jester hasn't stolen another corny crown and is wearing it undetected?
Consider this: It's entirely plausible that the "FMF" character might not be himself, an original. Perhaps the initial poster is merely using the chosen screen name of FMF, playing the lead role in multiple account roles. Similar to the legendary Peter Sellers in the film, "Dr. Strangelove Or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb."
Regardless of who FMF truly is, or how many personas he embodies in his roles, he doesn't match up to Peter Sellers when it comes to humor and portraying multiple characters.
Maybe, if we were to cast him in another film, we could describe his performance as simply eccentric. Dr. Strange, a remarkable comic strip character, devoid of a crown but adorned with a mantle of leadership. A cloaking device.
Isn't it possible that anyone here could be behind FMF, assuming a role to add a twist and a surprise to the mix? Perhaps that's the "whoosh" he implies?
Perhaps that's the "whammy" he takes pride in, when he claims that we fail to understand the connection between the various items he adds to his avatar, presumably to indicate to the others some sort of relative connection for those changing head and facial accessories.
It's intriguing to ponder whether anyone here might be behind FMF, assuming another role to deliver an extra "whammy" and an extra "whoosh" to the rest of the supporting cast needed in any grandiose movie production. These extras, whose names aren't listed in the "end credits," are often advertised as contributing to a movie with a cast of thousands.