Terrestrial comments from Will Schryver thread

[_wenglund]

In MsJack's defense, she, as the originator of the thread, has the right to determine for herself and her thread, that attacking William personally, is not "personal;" that it is "substantive" to selectively pick a few abrassive off-hand remarks of one individual, and this from amongst a plethra of seedy comments made routinely by a number of people on this board; and that any comments that don't support her posiition, are "off-topic."

As such, she is completely justified in not only making the requests to have my posts and a few others moved here, but to be indignant in being called to answer for the move.

Please know that I am fine with, and support the move, and was merely asking for clarification. Far be it from me to even hint that there is the least hypocrisy or lack of self-reflection on her part. She is obviously about matters of extreme import, and her methods and those who have joined the throng, are not to be questioned. She simply wishes to do what is best for all parties concerned.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_Buffalo]

In MsJack's defense, she, as the originator of the thread, has the right to determine for herself and her thread, that attacking William personally, is not "personal;" that it is "substantive" to selectively pick a few abrassive off-hand remarks of one individual, and this from amongst a plethra of seedy comments made routinely by a number of people on this board; and that any comments that don't support her posiition, are "off-topic."

As such, she is completely justified in not only making the requests to have my posts and a few others moved here, but to be indignant in being called to answer for the move.

Please know that I am fine with, and support the move, and was merely asking for clarification. Far be it from me to even hint that there is the least hypocrisy or lack of self-reflection on her part. She is obviously about matters of extreme import, and her methods and those who have joined the throng, are not to be questioned. She simply wishes to do what is best for all parties concerned.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Could you quote specifically where MsJack personally attacked Schryver?

[_wenglund]

See what I mean about your posts lacking substance? 25 words just to say "neener neener."

Yes...your point is made spectacularly with the unquestionably dense mass of substance packed into each intellectuallly and emotionally superior word of your scathing retort. Bravo. You can now graduate on to tilting windmills.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_wenglund]

Could you quote specifically where MsJack personally attacked Schryver?

That isn't possible. MsJack never once mentioned Will personally. She never once mentioned anything that Will personally said or was alleged to have said. And everything she wrote about whomever or whatever, was entirely positive and to the person's or things non-personal credit. I am at a loss to figure why anyone might think that she, if not also the horde to follow in her steps, would be thought to have personally attacked Will in the least.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_Buffalo]

Could you quote specifically where MsJack personally attacked Schryver?

That isn't possible. MsJack never once mentioned Will personally. She never once mentioned anything that Will personally said or was alleged to have said. And everything she wrote about whomever or whatever, was entirely positive and to the person's or things non-personal credit. I am at a loss to figure why anyone might think that she, if not also the horde to follow in her steps, would be thought to have personally attacked Will in the least.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

So, you can't quote a single personal attack from MsJack to Will in that thread?

[_Buffalo]

See what I mean about your posts lacking substance? 25 words just to say "neener neener."

Yes...your point is made spectacularly with the unquestionably dense mass of substance packed into each intellectuallly and emotionally superior word of your scathing retort. Bravo. You can now graduate on to tilting windmills.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Content analysis: initiate scan.

Scanning...

Scanning...

Scanning...

Content not found.

<end scan>

[_wenglund]

That isn't possible. MsJack never once mentioned Will personally. She never once mentioned anything that Will personally said or was alleged to have said. And everything she wrote about whomever or whatever, was entirely positive and to the person's or things non-personal credit. I am at a loss to figure why anyone might think that she, if not also the horde to follow in her steps, would be thought to have personally attacked Will in the least.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

So, you can't quote a single personal attack from MsJack to Will in that thread?

Of course not. That is what "it's impossible" means.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_Buffalo]

Of course not. That is what "it's impossible" means.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Oh, okay. That's weird because earlier you were claiming that she did. I guess you changed your mind.

In MsJack's defense, she, as the originator of the thread, has the right to determine for herself and her thread, that attacking William personally, is not "personal;"

[_MsJack]

In MsJack's defense, she, as the originator of the thread, has the right to determine for herself and her thread, that attacking William personally, is not "personal;"

CFR. Please cite the portion of my OP where I attacked William personally.

Oh, wait, I see Buffalo already asked for that, and you can't.

that it is "substantive" to selectively pick a few abrassive off-hand remarks of one individual, and this from amongst a plethra of seedy comments made routinely by a number of people on this board;

Pathetic, Wade. Just pathetic.

and that any comments that don't support her posiition, are "off-topic."

Wrong again. You expressly turned down my invitation to engage the OP. It was impossible for me to have your comments removed for not supporting my position because you never commented on my position, period.

Please know that I am fine with, and support the move, and was merely asking for clarification. Far be it from me to even hint that there is the least hypocrisy or lack of self-reflection on her part. She is obviously about matters of extreme import, and her methods and those who have joined the throng, are not to be questioned. She simply wishes to do what is best for all parties concerned.

So, you can't quote a single personal attack from MsJack to Will in that thread?

Nope. He's took a page from Dan Rather's playbook and made some [poop] up.

And this is why I asked for his nonsense to be quarantined in its own thread. Thank you, moderators.

[Gadianton]

Hey MsJack and Buffalo,

I realize now that your facetious detectors aren't functioning, but I wonder what you would accept as evidence of an attack if not a thread devoted to leveling and pursuing unflattering charges against someone? Would calling someone "pathetic" and equating them with a crying baby count? and insinuating that they are making "poop" up?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-