. <- the point ....................... your rainbows and happiness reply -> :D (way far away)16shadowsMarch 29 2007, 22:47:29 UTC
1) At the bottom of your post: Allow comments? --> Disabled
Then Steve and I can't kick your bruises, and you won't feel compelled to tell so very kindly to fuck off.
2) Or you can make the post visible to only you.
3) Or you can make a list and include only Greg and whever else wouldn't give you a bit of constructive criticism to save their life.
4) I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure I didn't actually accuse you of saturating myself and Steve with horrible candy sweetness.
I accused you of denial.
5) I was going to leave this thing alone. Honestly. But you told Steve to fuck off. Steve was not trying to hurt you. That question he quoted? He just answered it. And you went off on him because you didn't like his answer.
There is no way you can convince me that that isn't overreacting.
6) If I am superior in my sarcasm, it is only here, because you are so DAMN superior in your "eternal exuberance".
7) I am trying to get you to see that Steve and I have relevant points. In case you could not discern it, the point about yourself that you were trying to make, that you have an overwhelmingly happy outlook on life, and that there is nothing wrong with that, I understand. I have included it in my responses.
8) Your approach in labeling my and Steve's outlooks on life inferior to yours hurts and infuriates me to the same degree as my brothers' refusal to view me as a valid human being.
9) Since you chose not to IM me, I am leaving you alone on AIM, but these comments back and forth are like shouting at each other with a half mile between us. (Classy and effective.)
Then Steve and I can't kick your bruises, and you won't feel compelled to tell so very kindly to fuck off.
2) Or you can make the post visible to only you.
3) Or you can make a list and include only Greg and whever else wouldn't give you a bit of constructive criticism to save their life.
4) I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure I didn't actually accuse you of saturating myself and Steve with horrible candy sweetness.
I accused you of denial.
5) I was going to leave this thing alone. Honestly. But you told Steve to fuck off. Steve was not trying to hurt you. That question he quoted? He just answered it. And you went off on him because you didn't like his answer.
There is no way you can convince me that that isn't overreacting.
6) If I am superior in my sarcasm, it is only here, because you are so DAMN superior in your "eternal exuberance".
7) I am trying to get you to see that Steve and I have relevant points. In case you could not discern it, the point about yourself that you were trying to make, that you have an overwhelmingly happy outlook on life, and that there is nothing wrong with that, I understand. I have included it in my responses.
8) Your approach in labeling my and Steve's outlooks on life inferior to yours hurts and infuriates me to the same degree as my brothers' refusal to view me as a valid human being.
9) Since you chose not to IM me, I am leaving you alone on AIM, but these comments back and forth are like shouting at each other with a half mile between us. (Classy and effective.)
Reply
Leave a comment