Kevin Graham Resorts to Intimidation Tactics

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_MsJack
_Emeritus
Posts: 4375
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 5:06 am

Re: Kevin Graham Resorts to Intimidation Tactics

Post by _MsJack »

why me wrote:Actually you were a kinder and more gentle poster in the past. What has happened to you in the meantime is a mystery. Your posts are now bitter, sassy, and spiteful and full of spite. Something happened to you along the way.

As far as my responses to you go?

Your consistent anti-Protestant rhetoric is what happened to me.
"It seems to me that these women were the head (κεφάλαιον) of the church which was at Philippi." ~ John Chrysostom, Homilies on Philippians 13

My Blogs: Weighted Glory | Worlds Without End: A Mormon Studies Roundtable | Twitter
_EAllusion
_Emeritus
Posts: 18519
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 12:39 pm

Re: Kevin Graham Resorts to Intimidation Tactics

Post by _EAllusion »

Don -

That isn't even remotely true. Have you been reading the bulk of Pahoran's recent posts? If you have and that is your conclusion, I can only suggest the change is in you rather than Pahoran. The opening line of the post this thread is in reference to starts out, "Over on the Traitors and Haters' board,..." wherein critics are ostensibly referred to as a "hate clique."

The exchanges going on with Beastie right now are downright nasty. And she is not responding in kind. If you haven't read those, by all means do. If you have and would like me to quote some examples of what I think belies a mellowing out, I will.
_Kishkumen
_Emeritus
Posts: 21373
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 10:00 pm

Re: Kevin Graham Resorts to Intimidation Tactics

Post by _Kishkumen »

onandagus wrote:Pahoran dropped his argument and accepted Kevin's explanation, averring only that, given the verbal parallel, the question had been worth asking. How often does anyone on the boards admit to being wrong about anything? I say kudos to Pahoran.



Should we really give him credit for accepting Kevin's explanation in a way that is designed to make himself out to be the better person?

"In saying that I accept your explanation, I am doing something you aren't capable of."

Sorry, but I don't see much to applaud there. Certainly it does not show anything like humility.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
_Simon Belmont

Re: Kevin Graham Resorts to Intimidation Tactics

Post by _Simon Belmont »

why me wrote:spiteful and full of spite.


Spiteful and full of spite?

Say it 'ain't so!

(just kidding)
_Kevin Graham
_Emeritus
Posts: 13037
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 6:44 pm

Re: Kevin Graham Resorts to Intimidation Tactics

Post by _Kevin Graham »

Don, you're a smart guy, so I know you're only saying this because you have not witnessed Pahoran's comments on the Schryver thread. Let me recap what we get from Pahoran first seven posts:

Post #1: He accused MsJack of using a "poison pen," saying she must be proud about that, and implies that she was trying to get NAMI to reject Will's article. This is false of course, but don't expect the facts to get in the way of Pahoran's juicy theories. He based his attack on zero evidence, as usual.

Post #2: He calls MsJack "Auntie Jack" and then rationalizes Will's history of revolting commentary as mere "trash talk." He argues that these posts are relatively few when compared to the thousands of posts Schryver has made on the forums, as if this is supposed to mean anything.

Post #3: He attacks MsJack again, essentially calling her a hypocrite and questions her sincerity and honesty.

Post #4: He breaks a forum rule by mentioning a name and then asked Kishkumen if that was his in real life identity. Oh the irony!

Post #5: He attacks Scratch, saying his informant is just his imagination, which means Scratch must be lying. However, Scratch has recently been vindicated. He called it days before it was announced. The man behind Schryver's fallout with NAMI, was Brian Hauglid. Can we expect the new and improved Pahoran to admit being wrong about that one? We both know the answer. If I press him to face up to the fact that Scratch's informant was proven correct, he'll ignore the request or pretend he never had interest in it.

Post #6: Pahoran tried to defend Schyver's usage of the word circle-jerk, because the urbal dictionary provides five definitions, one of which has nothing to do with sexual innuendo. So of course, that must be the one William was using. His evidence? He doesn't say, but I'm guessing it is Will's say so. I have since proved this argument false. Let's find out if Pahoran is willing to admit being wrong about this. But don't hold your breath.

Post #7 Pahoran then goes on to attack harmony, essentially calling her a liar because she has a temple recommend, and Pahoran doesn’t think she could get one without lying. He calls her a liar and then ridicules the forum by saying her deception using a sock puppet is what qualifies her to be a mod: "I wouldn't believe her if she told me the sky was blue." This he did, just before explaining to me that to call someone a liar is to prove your hate for them. So Pahoran essentially admits, using his own logic, that he absolutely hates everyone he has accused of lying (there are many).

So tell me Don, does this sound like a new and improved Pahoran? He added absolutely nothing to that thread, but tried to divert and derail as much as he could. Within a half dozen posts he managed to go after MsJack, harmony, Scrath and even Kishkumen. Essentially anyone who dared speak up. And then we saw how he then went after me.

And now, since Pahoran claims he is willing to admit being wrong when shown to be wrong, let's put his "graciousness" to the test. In that thread he claimed Will Schryver used "circlejerk" in a nonsexual manner. Nomad later created a thread based on this argument, and I dismantled almost immediately, revealing even more revolting commentary from our erstwhile circlejerk expert.

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 retarded frat game is called "Limp Biscuit"... which kind of indirectly explains why the band of the same namesake is so damned 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...


In the context of his "orgiastic circle jerk" comment, Will calls us a bunch of "buggerers" which might go over the heads of anyone not familiar with British or Austrailian slang. Urban dictionary defines the verb bugger as follows:

1. Technically means to sodomize, but most people use the word in a variety of situations, often without realizing the true meaning.

2. Australian, derived from buggering, which means anal intercourse. Now mostly used as a slang word as an exclamation of surprise or discontent. May be used to refer to a creature or human.

3. To sodomize someone.

4. vb. the act of committing sodomy
n. person who commits sodomy (n.), ie. has anal intercourse.



So will Pahoran show the integrity to admit being wrong? He claims he isn't defending Will, but he is. His client is a sick individual who has accused every one here of engaging in group anal sex with one another. As far as I'm concerned this is far worse than the C-word.
Last edited by YahooSeeker [Bot] on Sat May 28, 2011 11:16 am, edited 2 times in total.
_Runtu
_Emeritus
Posts: 16721
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:06 am

Re: Kevin Graham Resorts to Intimidation Tactics

Post by _Runtu »

MsJack wrote:He continues to assume the worst of the worst out of anyone who disagrees with him.


This is a problem with a lot of people, myself included. I think we assume that other people are like us and act as we would in differnt situations. Some people expect others to be well-meaning and honest (because they are well-meaning and honest), and they are shocked to find that others may not be like that. Some people expect others to be mean-spirited and vituperative, because they themselves are that way. So, even when someone is honest, reasonable, and kind, such people are seen as duplicitous or fake or whatever, because their "opponent" sees them as being nasty and evil underneath it all.

In short, I think the way we treat others, here or in real life, is more a reflection of who we are than it is about how others really think and behave.
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington
_Simon Belmont

Re: Kevin Graham Resorts to Intimidation Tactics

Post by _Simon Belmont »

I'm starting to question this Angry McAngerton nickname I've come up with for Kevin.

If my initials were K.G. I would definitely add some vowels in there, and go by the nickname "KAGE."

Yes, KAGE, that will do nicely. Like a KAGE fighter -- an angry KAGE fighter.
_Kishkumen
_Emeritus
Posts: 21373
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 10:00 pm

Re: Kevin Graham Resorts to Intimidation Tactics

Post by _Kishkumen »

Simon Belmont wrote:I'm starting to question this Angry McAngerton nickname I've come up with for Kevin.

If my initials were K.G. I would definitely add some vowels in there, and go by the nickname "KAGE."

Yes, KAGE, that will do nicely. Like a KAGE fighter -- an angry KAGE fighter.


Way to stay on point, Simon.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
_Runtu
_Emeritus
Posts: 16721
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:06 am

Re: Kevin Graham Resorts to Intimidation Tactics

Post by _Runtu »

Simon Belmont wrote:I'm starting to question this Angry McAngerton nickname I've come up with for Kevin.

If my initials were K.G. I would definitely add some vowels in there, and go by the nickname "KAGE."

Yes, KAGE, that will do nicely. Like a KAGE fighter -- an angry KAGE fighter.


I don't think Kevin has anything on you when it comes to anger.
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington
_cafe crema
_Emeritus
Posts: 2042
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 5:07 am

Re: Kevin Graham Resorts to Intimidation Tactics

Post by _cafe crema »

why me wrote:
café crema wrote:
Pot calling the kettle black, with redundancy.


passive-aggressive poster.


Not passive-aggressive, you see first I'd have to be nice and agree with you and follow it up with not nice. That's your speciality.
Post Reply