VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: [1], 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: Thu, Apr 22 2004, 17:15:38
Author: MKIceman
Subject: Re: The word "pompous"
In reply to: Vanessa 's message, "Re: The word "pompous"" on Thu, Apr 22 2004, 11:49:37

>>According to the Oxford Dictionary, the word "pompous"
>>means "self-important."
>
>Which is exactly how you come across, with your thread
>hijacking, spamming and then pointing out if we 'OMG!'
>post in the wrong thread, that we're wrong for doing
>so. Oh need I mention the 'Board vs Chatroom' and
>other threads you posted, wherein you acted like you
>were the be all and end all of the board, GAFF's
>saviour?

Regarding "thread hijacking," see my response to your other post.

Regarding spamming, I do not see how discussing something -- responding to others -- is spamming the board. I suppose posting many unqualified "I agree" or "That fic makes me puke!" comments is not spam, but addressing many specific points made in a discussion is spam?

Regarding the "wrong thread" comments, have you read my response to Heywood and ladypilot in that thread? Please do, because that explains the reason behind the facetious "wrong thread" comments (i.e., a commentary on VoyForum's clearly inadequate format).

Regarding the two threads I made about format, I suppose when everyone else makes several different threads about suggestions for a new board, it's acceptable, but when I offer discussion on format, I'm seen as pompous? To avoid "spamming," as you unequivocally view all my posts regardless of content, I contained the discussion on format within those two threads. In fact, I started it when format came up in the "Possible Locations for a New Board" thread, because I didn't want to add to that already huge thread.

>The decision is not yours to make and if it is, I'm

I established in the beginning of those two threads that they were discussions for board members. Where did I state, implicitly or explicitly, that these suggestions were to be used by The Site Guru? The motivation behind starting such discussions was to help focus members on something more constructive, or, at least, more thought-provoking, than merely complaining about getting TOSsed. But I guess it's all just spam to you.

>Pompous? That's how you have behaved, there is no
>proof here within your posts to prove otherwise.
>
>>I find it interesting that, of all people, you -- the
>>person who brags that her cleavage can enslave men --
>>accuse me of being pompous, despite all my posts
>>discussing ego and arrogance.
>
>Oh so an obvious joke, a clearly made jest about the
>cleavage is wrong, whilst your so called 'joke' about
>hanging on to Heywood's testicles and such, that you
>insisted was a joke, is perfectly acceptable?

The difference is that, while Tilly repeatedly makes that joke, I never insisted that my comment was a joke, and I only made that specific comment (i.e., terming the suck-ups as testicle-lickers, and describing their obsession with Heywood) once. Twice, if you count this post. The rest of the thread addresses misinterpretations of that statement.

So, is a comment made about one's physical assets not pompous, but a comment made about potential stalkers (with some sympathy for the victim, Heywood) is pompous?

>I note by the above, you have taken the cleavage joke
>too seriously. Yet it is also in your opinion,
>Heywood took your comments about him too seriously.

Regarding the cleavage joke, no, since I was using it as a rebuttal of Tilly's name-calling. If she wishes to call me pompous, I would like to see some quotes that we can objectively analyze, in order to assert or reject her claim.

Regarding Heywood taking comments seriously, I was referring to Ayezur's post that stated he was depressed about it. I don't feel that anyone needs to be depressed about anything that is said here, and, if they are, they should take a step back and think about what really matters in their life and what should really matter. For some, the Internet matters the most, but should it?

>Oh what double standards we have here. Pot, meet
>kettle.

Indeed, when, despite your stated dislike of posts mentioning even passing references to Heywood, you yourself make such references here. I suppose I am making this all about Heywood, or all about me, by responding?

--Matt

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]


Forum timezone: GMT-3
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.