The MDB Schryver Jihad: How to Smear Your Opponent

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_Ceeboo
_Emeritus
Posts: 7625
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 1:58 am

Re: The MDB Schryver Jihad: How to Smear Your Opponent

Post by _Ceeboo »

Kevin Graham wrote:Better hold on to your crotch Will/Nomad, because this is going to hurt. And bcspace might want to get ready to scurry off again after reading the following...


Will Schryver previously stated:

By the way, I for one am quite confident that most of you losers here in the Trailer Park are shameless buggerers. Else why your proclivity for the orgiastic circle jerks in which you all enthusiastically participate? Like this thread, for example. Graham tosses out the biscuit, and you're all in a circle on a moment's notice


Urban dictionary notes that people often confuse the "limp biscuit" game with circle jerks:

"*NOT* when a group of males stand in a circle to jerk off onto a cookie or anything of the sort. That r******* frat game is called "Limp Biscuit"... which kind of indirectly explains why the band of the same namesake is so f*****g horrible.


So thanks to Will's "biscuit" comment, there can be no doubt what Will meant in this context.

In another example Will says,

And of course you'd regard my most recent work as "increasingly obnoxious." After all, you've never been averse to taking your place right in the middle of the circle, heartily pounding out an approving beat for each and every orgiastic excess. You belong here.


According to Urban Dictionary the circle jerk also refers to:

A fraternity initiation ritual or hazing whereby the lights are turned off. The plege or pledges are told it's a circle jerk. The actives pound their fists together in the darkness simulating the sound of jerking off. The lights are then turned on suddenly and the pledge or pledges are the only ones in the circle with their dicks out.


Hence, there can be no doubt what Will was referring to when he says "pounding out an approving beat."

We can also be confident in this meaning because Will uses the word "orgiastic." Urban Dictionary on the word Orgiastic:

The new word replacing "horny" the same definition but different word. cause horny blows. Spread the word that horny is out.


Urban Dictionary defines Orgy:
1.Sex party involving many partners
2. A party where many people engage in sex at the same time.
3. A large group of people screwing togethe
4... you get the point

Urban Dictionary defines Circle Jerk many ways too:

1. When a group of males sit in a circle, jerking each other off.
2. When a bunch of blowhards - usually politicians - get together for a debate but usually end up agreeing with each other's viewpoints to the point of redundancy, stroking each other's egos as if they were extensions of their genitals (ergo, the mastubatory insinuation).
3. A masturbation party; can be with guys or girls. Everyone usually sits in a circle and jacks off in the company of other people.
4. Group masturbation, usually males, sitting or standing in a circle jerking themselves or each other off.
5. You get the point...


So nice try Will/Nomad.


Once again, Kevin delivers another TKO! (This is starting to get silly, in my opinion)


Perhaps some strong consideration for a new "stategy" is in order. (I feel bad watching some get pummeled like this)

Peace,
Ceeboo
_Kishkumen
_Emeritus
Posts: 21373
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 10:00 pm

Re: The MDB Schryver Jihad: How to Smear Your Opponent

Post by _Kishkumen »

I don't understand why Nomad and Pahoran are spending their time making arguments for Will here, when all apologists know that this place is a backwater with absolutely no significance.

Why don't they petition NAMIRS on Will's behalf? Isn't this an internal apologetic affair?

You don't imagine that you'll convince us that he is some great guy who is just misunderstood, no?

And, when most people here support Will's work getting published by NAMIRS, what is it you are fighting with us over anyway?

Go convince the people who oppose the publication. Apparently you have already won almost all of us over!
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
_wenglund
_Emeritus
Posts: 4947
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 7:25 pm

Re: The MDB Schryver Jihad: How to Smear Your Opponent

Post by _wenglund »

Buffalo wrote:
wenglund wrote:Much gratitude to the Three Stooges (Cam, Scratch, and Graham) for unwittingly underscoring my point.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-


We should all learn a valuable lesson here - no matter what is said in any conversation, it only proves Wade's point.


No rational person with even a modest grasp of logic would extrapolate that "lesson" from what I said--which explains why you did. Enjoy the fog.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-
"Why should I care about being consistent?" --Mister Scratch (MD, '08)
_wenglund
_Emeritus
Posts: 4947
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 7:25 pm

Re: The MDB Schryver Jihad: How to Smear Your Opponent

Post by _wenglund »

Kishkumen wrote:I don't understand why Nomad and Pahoran are spending their time making arguments for Will here, when all apologists know that this place is a backwater with absolutely no significance.!


Perhaps you have forgotten, but we saints have a moral imperative to seek out the lost sheep, including those who have wandered into and taken up residence in the backwaters of insignificance.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-
"Why should I care about being consistent?" --Mister Scratch (MD, '08)
_Kishkumen
_Emeritus
Posts: 21373
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 10:00 pm

Re: The MDB Schryver Jihad: How to Smear Your Opponent

Post by _Kishkumen »

wenglund wrote:Perhaps you have forgotten, but we saints have a moral imperative to seek out the lost sheep, including those who have wandered into and taken up residence in the backwaters of insignificance.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-


Wade, that is a pathetically lame explanation of your activities here. No one, and I mean no one, is likely to feel moved by your "apologetics" on Will's behalf in such a way that they will return to the LDS Church.

Talk about a ludicrous stretch. LOL!!!
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
_Buffalo
_Emeritus
Posts: 12064
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 10:33 pm

Re: The MDB Schryver Jihad: How to Smear Your Opponent

Post by _Buffalo »

wenglund wrote:
Kishkumen wrote:I don't understand why Nomad and Pahoran are spending their time making arguments for Will here, when all apologists know that this place is a backwater with absolutely no significance.!


Perhaps you have forgotten, but we saints have a moral imperative to seek out the lost sheep, including those who have wandered into and taken up residence in the backwaters of insignificance.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-


And when you find those lost sheep, be sure to bring them back into the fold with Christian compassion, by calling them bitches, sluts and buggerers. :)
Parley P. Pratt wrote:We must lie to support brother Joseph, it is our duty to do so.

B.R. McConkie, © Intellectual Reserve wrote:There are those who say that revealed religion and organic evolution can be harmonized. This is both false and devilish.
_Molok
_Emeritus
Posts: 1832
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 4:31 am

Re: The MDB Schryver Jihad: How to Smear Your Opponent

Post by _Molok »

The dead horse suffers yet another blow!
_wenglund
_Emeritus
Posts: 4947
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 7:25 pm

Re: The MDB Schryver Jihad: How to Smear Your Opponent

Post by _wenglund »

Kishkumen wrote: Wade, that is a pathetically lame explanation of your activities here. No one, and I mean no one, is likely to feel moved by your "apologetics" on Will's behalf in such a way that they will return to the LDS Church.

Talk about a ludicrous stretch. LOL!!!


Not that you may understand, but we don't come here necessarily expecting the sheep to be persuaded by our appeals to common sense, fairness, and practicality. In fact, we may often expect, based on past experience, that some of the lost sheep here will mistakenly find our rational approach "pathetically lame" and a "ludicrous stretch." Again, such is bound to happen with the upside-down thinking of the lost sheep (which, in part, is why some sheep became lost to begin with).

I realize, too, that it may be a jolt to the sheep's prodigious egos to be informed that their anonymous musings about matters that are really none of their business, and on a relatively obscure board whose backwaters have the consistency of a cesspool, are of little or no moment.

So, as a bad fix intended to stop the escaping hot air from their over-inflated egos, these precious sheep imagine that our visits here is evidence of the immense power and significance of their anonymous words. And, that is okay. I see no harm come to anyone with this relatively insignificant self-delusion.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-
"Why should I care about being consistent?" --Mister Scratch (MD, '08)
_wenglund
_Emeritus
Posts: 4947
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 7:25 pm

Re: The MDB Schryver Jihad: How to Smear Your Opponent

Post by _wenglund »

Buffalo wrote: And when you find those lost sheep, be sure to bring them back into the fold with Christian compassion, by calling them bitches, sluts and buggerers. :)


I can see the point of communicating to people in their own culturally imbued language or idioms, that is except for those, like many here, who may be seriously, though selectively, metaphor-challenged (i.e. those who can't, in some cases, tell the difference between literal and figurative expressions).

Thanks, -Wade Englund-
"Why should I care about being consistent?" --Mister Scratch (MD, '08)
_Some Schmo
_Emeritus
Posts: 15602
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 2:59 pm

Re: The MDB Schryver Jihad: How to Smear Your Opponent

Post by _Some Schmo »

wenglund wrote:
Buffalo wrote: We should all learn a valuable lesson here - no matter what is said in any conversation, it only proves Wade's point.

No rational person with even a modest grasp of logic would extrapolate that "lesson" from what I said--which explains why you did. Enjoy the fog.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Nor would a person with even a modest grasp of logic extrapolate that Buffulo's desire was to turn specifically what you said into what he said, rather than the obvious point that every time you talk, you want to convince people that everything you say has a purpose rather than the fact that you regularly “F” up and stick you foot in your mouth (probably because you haven't managed to orally reach your dick yet, but that's another matter).

Honestly, do you think you're fooling anyone? Seriously?

...alrighty, then.

Thanks, -Some Schmo-
God belief is for people who don't want to live life on the universe's terms.
Post Reply