The apologist head in a basket

Post by **_Trevor** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 12:56 am

dartagnan wrote:If charity really condemned this kind of rumor-mongering, she has an odd way of showing it.

I am sure this is only what the unnamed person said about himself on some public board.

Post by **_asbestosman** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 12:56 am

dartagnan wrote:If charity really condemned this kind of rumor-mongering, she has an odd way of showing it.

Because to Charity, it's not rumor-mongering if the person is unnamed.

I'm not saying I agree with that, but apparently the rumors spread about you are associated with your name and are done to specifically discredit you. Charity does not appear to be involved in that at least if your name is specified.

Post by **_Trevor** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 12:58 am

asbestosman wrote:Because to Charity, it's not rumor-mongering if the person is unnamed.

I'm not saying I agree with that, but apparently the rumors spread about you are associated with your name and are done to specifically discredit you. Charity does not appear to be involved in that at least if your name is specified.

Where do I buy charity's manual about how to condemn people behind their backs without gossiping? This thing must be damned complicated. So many rules, or excuses, or whatever.

Post by **_dartagnan** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 1:04 am

Because to Charity, it's not rumor-mongering if the person is unnamed.

Charity's idiocy aside, if, as you say, she really didn't approve of these things that were said, she never would have relayed them our way as "evidence" of something.

I'm not saying I agree with that, but apparently the rumors spread about you are associated with your name and are done to specifically discredit you. Charity does not appear to be involved in that at least if your name is specified.

Óf course, you're assuming she didn't have me in mind. Apparently, you think charity is dumber than I do. I say this because there is simply no way (given the well-known history connecting me to this rumor) she could have come to this forum, knowing that I posted here, in a discussion about posters on this forum, and said the things she said, without expecting the entire audience to infer she was speaking of me.

I never thought I'd say this but... charity isn't that stupid.

Post by **_asbestosman** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 1:05 am

Trevor wrote:Where do I buy charity's manual about how to condemn people behind their backs without gossiping?

Acts 8:20

Post by **_dartagnan** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 1:05 am

Where do I buy charity's manual about how to condemn people behind their backs without gossiping?

You're killing me Trev.

Post by **_Trevor** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 1:05 am

dartagnan wrote:I never thought I'd say this but... charity isn't that stupid.

Truly we live in an age of miracles.

Post by **_Trevor** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 1:09 am

asbestosman wrote:
Trevor wrote:Where do I buy charity's manual about how to condemn people behind their backs without gossiping?

Acts 8:20

Wow. Humbled twice in such a profound way in a single evening! I should have known that is was by the Holy Spirit that charity had the power to smear Kevin without sinning. And here I asked to buy the manual. Save me, Jebus!

Post by **_Trevor** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 1:10 am

dartagnan wrote:You're killing me Trev.

Sorry, Kevin. I wasn't as good as you at avoiding the vino.

Post by **_asbestosman** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 1:10 am

dartagnan wrote:Charity's idiocy aside, if, as you say, she really didn't approve of these things that were said, she never would have relayed them our way as "evidence" of something.

Apparently she didn't disapprove of what was said. She disapproves of it being said in connection with a specific name.

Óf course, you're assuming she didn't have me in mind. Apparently, you think charity is dumber than I do. I say this because there is simply no way (given the well-known history connecting me to this rumor) she could have come to this forum, knowin I posted here, in a discussion about posters on this forum, and said the things she said, without expecting the entire audience to infer she was speaking of me.

I never thought I'd say this but... charity isn't that stupid.

I learned of this rumor only from hanging around other boards outside of MAD that you also hang out on. Charity has not done this until now. So unless MA&D keeps talking about that rumor publicly (and I don't remember seeing it there), then I think Charity can indeed claim ignorance about that particular rumor. It is true that you come up on MAD from time to time, but I don't remember it ever being done in connection with that particular rumor. If MAD often mentions it publicly, then please, by all means claim that I'm that dumb. for what it's worth, I've been reading and posting at MAD less and less of late.