General
03 Jul 21
- Joined
- 06 Nov 15
- Moves
- 41301
06 Jul 21
@the-gravedigger saidThough he's exhibited a few level hangups and his doors of perception are frequently locked.
He certainly had his ups and downs 🙄
@suzianne saidYou’ve unjustly accused me of lying, bullying, stalking, victimising and general harassment of a notorious abuser who is now banned along with all their fake accounts which you and Duchess64 berated me about.
Ah, now we see the violence inherent in the system!
Don’t you feel like you owe me and acknowledgement that you were wrong and an apology?
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 29599
@divegeester saidYou probably hold the site record for the poster who has requested the most apologies.
You’ve unjustly accused me of lying, bullying, stalking, victimising and general harassment of a notorious abuser who is now banned along with all their fake accounts which you and Duchess64 berated me about.
Don’t you feel like you owe me and acknowledgement that you were wrong and an apology?
@ghost-of-a-duke saidIt’s not a KPI I’ve been tracking, but I can understand why you would want to change the subject.
You probably hold the site record for the poster who has requested the most apologies.
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 29599
06 Jul 21
@divegeester saidYou often present yourself as a victim who deserves an apology when in reality you have offended others far more than you've been offended yourself.
It’s not a KPI I’ve been tracking, but I can understand why you would want to change the subject.
@divegeester saidUnjustly?
You’ve unjustly accused me of lying, bullying, stalking, victimising and general harassment of a notorious abuser who is now banned along with all their fake accounts which you and Duchess64 berated me about.
Don’t you feel like you owe me and acknowledgement that you were wrong and an apology?
Hahahahaha...
@fmf saidFMF replied to Suzianne.
What do you think of all the 'verbal' violence Duchess64 has been aiming at drewnogal?
After Kevin Eleven wrote a post (now deleted by RHP) about Divegeester 'wiggling a tampon' inside me,
Drewnogal claimed (or pretended) that she would NOT have been offended IF it had been written about her.
But her lying troll ally FMF has been loudly implying that Drewnogal's rightly very
offended because I dared to describe her as white (Drewnogal wrote that she's ethnically Polish)
or elderly (Drewnogal wrote that her parents were oppressed in 1940--81 years ago).
So note the absurd inconsistency about Drewnogal--who likes to play the victim--being offended.
1) Drewnogal would NOT be offended (so she said or implied) by a man writing about
'wiggling a tampon' inside her.
2) But Drewnogal is EXTREMELY offended (she said so) by being described as elderly.
And her troll ally FMF implied that Drewnogal's offended by being described as white.
Given all that, I would say that Drewnogal has an extremely odd 'sensitivity' about being offended.
@ghost-of-a-duke saidThere was a time when a version of Ghost of a Duke would have stood shoulder to shoulder with me in defending other users from hard core pornographic abuse.
Dive is such a victim. Perhaps we should have a whip-round and buy him a blanket.
How you have managed to deteriorate from that stoicism into standing by Suzianne and her fantasy claims about me bribing Russ to ban users is disappointing but on trend I suppose.
@ghost-of-a-duke saidCould you not just as easily ~ and more plausibly ~ be saying this to Duchess64?
You often present yourself as a victim who deserves an apology when in reality you have offended others far more than you've been offended yourself.
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 29599
@divegeester saidIf you're going to make a point, at least make a valid one.
There was a time when a version of Ghost of a Duke would have stood shoulder to shoulder with me in defending other users from hard core pornographic abuse.
I've clearly stated that if the poster concerned did indeed use a pornographic avatar as described then they were rightly banned by the Mods. My issue was your public accusations to another new member when these accusations should have been taken to the Mods to investigate. The fact that they turned out to be the original offender doesn't validate your actions, because if you had been wrong (entirely possible) a new member who hadn't posted anything offensive would have been publically challenged for no reason.
This is the same principle as not publically accusing somebody of using a chess engine. (Which most reasonable people agree with). Suspicions should always be reported to the Mods who are better positioned to investigate.
This really isn't rocket science.
@ghost-of-a-duke saidGhost of Duke replied to Divegeester
If you're going to make a point, at least make a valid one.
I've clearly stated that if the poster concerned did indeed use a pornographic avatar as described then they were rightly banned by the Mods. My issue was your public accusations to another new member when these accusations should have been taken to the Mods to investigate. The fact that they turned out t ...[text shortened]... reported to the Mods who are better positioned to investigate.
This really isn't rocket science.
In fact, Divegeester recently publicly accused me of cheating at chess, claiming that
it's obvious that's the only way that I could have achieved my rating (2097) at RHP.
Of course, Divegeester offered no evidence to support his false accusation.
Divegeester (rated 1033) also recently boasted that he obviously is superior to me at chess and everything else.
07 Jul 21
@duchess64 saidIf that comment about chess WAS NOT a tongue in cheek post by divegeester, then he is deluded.
Divegeester (rated 1033) also recently boasted that he obviously is superior to me at chess and everything else.