I'm a Woman?

[_Kishkumen]

That is correct.

Your point?

You don't know the meaning of androgynous. That is my point.

[_Simon Belmont]

Of course I will attempt to appear on each DCP thread, to show you how stupid they are. You claim to have retired twice now, and I wonder if your words will hold any meaning after you cry wolf a few more times. In addition, you've never explained to me exactly why you've been on this five year crusade against DCP. You vaguely claim he's done "mopologetic stuff" but what? What has he done to you? Let's let it all out, Scratch, and if you can do it without picking on unrelated people you find on Facebook I will continue to talk to you.

I am serious, I sincerely want to know what the big deal is. Can you handle talking about it?

[_Kishkumen]

Thank you for your remarks on this thread, Elder F. I know that you can always be counted on--without question, it seems--to show up on each and every thread in which DCP is mentioned.

Well, someone needs to stick up for Daniel now that he has been reduced to announcing bad omens from his house.

[_Simon Belmont]

I would stick up for anyone who was being bullied for no reason.

[_Doctor Scratch]

Simon:

Did you know that there are actually two versions of the Cassius Ultimate Frisbee mascot? One is just regular old (Moderator Note)Possible in real life information removed The other is an older guy--rather like the picture of that wizard that you posted to your phony old Facebook page. This version we call "Elder Possible in real life information removed" Doesn't it just warm your heart that you're still part of the Cassius U. Family in this sense?

[_Kishkumen]

I would stick up for anyone who was being bullied for no reason.

Then you picked the wrong person to defend. I would say that, in this case, "no reason" is a difficult argument to make. Very difficult.

[_Simon Belmont]

In a way, Scratch, it's funny that you're chickening out of having a real discussion.

It means you know you're wrong, and you don't want me to verbally kick your butt once again.

I understand.

Then you picked the wrong person to defend. I would say that, in this case, "no reason" is a difficult argument to make. Very difficult.

Scratch, of course, has no reason. If he did, he'd state it in no uncertain terms.

He won't. He just chickens out.

[_Kishkumen]

Scratch, of course, has no reason. If he did, he'd state it in no uncertain terms.

He won't. He just chickens out.

You must be incredibly skilled at self-deception if you really believe that tripe. Scratch was morally appalled by Daniel's apologetic tactics. That was his reason. It is not like he has never shared this information. Are you suffering from a selective memory lapse?

[_Simon Belmont]

You must be incredibly skilled at self-deception if you really believe that tripe. Scratch was morally appalled by Daniel's apologetic tactics. That was his reason. It is not like he has never shared this information. Are you suffering from a selective memory lapse?

Yes yes, DCP's "mopologetic stuff," it's always so vague. I want to know what, exactly, constitutes a five year crusade against one person, and I don't want to hear your speculations. I want to hear it from Scratch.

But of course, Scratch will chicken out, as usual.

[_Kishkumen]

Yes yes, DCP's "mopologetic stuff," it's always so vague. I want to know what, exactly, constitutes a five year crusade against one person, and I don't want to hear your speculations. I want to hear it from Scratch.

But of course, Scratch will chicken out, as usual.

Always so vague? Only if you put blinders on. He has posted example after example of exactly what he finds offensive. You are just morally blind to what others find reprehensible, because you give it a pass on the grounds that it is justified by the attack that preceded it. Your request for motive and evidence is completely disingenuous. You know the answers; you just don't accept them and so your tactic is to throw up idiotic requests, vapid questions, and baseless criticisms. It always has been.