God bless you and him always. 
I’ll stick with my iPhone, thanks. All these new machines coming out every couple months are wearing me out.
I still use the old “string attached to a cardboard tube” trick.
Soup can, cardboard tube… now there’s a thought!
I’m worried about Bricker. I don’t think we should have sent him in there, you guys.
I hope he took a lunch. And a bag to hurl it into when it comes back up.
OK.
Going forward, I’d like the option of simply expressing an uninformed opinion.
Thanks.
Now, the thread.
Starving Artist, I’m afraid you don’t come across well at all in that thread. Apart from the incredible tone-deaf nature of your commentary, the simple fact of the matter is that from a standpoint of physical connections, you were factually wrong. Unfortunately, what happened in that thread was that as visceral disgust over the proposition continued to rise, people stopped trying to convince you of this and simply began hurling insults. But in their defense, this did not happen right away; it only came about after repeated attempts to answer the factual issue.
The problem with this statement is twofold: first, there’s no reasonable way it won’t be perceived as a surrogate rectum, and with that perception comes very understandable disgust and dismay because the people involved cannot help understanding that what happened to that little boy is something that should be beyond the ken of little children. Secondly, putting aside that visceral disgust, an adult who can squat – that is, lower his body by flexing his knees – can place himself in the requisite position, and without any particularly gymnastic endeavors necessary.
If you’d like to take this to PM, I would undertake to explain and answer you further why, from a simple factual perspective, your view in that thread was incorrect; I don’t believe that a second try here would be of much help.
All that said, the poor judgement and understand shown in that thread by SA does not make any future assertion from him on any other subject to immediate gainsay simply because he was wrong, however spectacularly, in that thread.
Well shit. Bricker has placed himself at the head of the pack for the 2013 Golden Paper Towel Tube Award.
Thank you, Bricker, sincerely.
Indeed. I wonder if you care to reconsider your aspersions (from post 140, IIRC) in this thread in any way.
Well, yes. Having learned you were in fact more right than wrong, obviously I would not take such a dismissive tone about the possibility of you being right.
I did say that perhaps this time you’re relating things fairly, but I called such a possibility a rare one. Obviously it was in fact true that you were relating things fairly, which doesn’t invalidate what I said, but certainly puts it in a poor light.
So, sorry. I think it’s fair to say you and are not besties, though, and my original response was colored by that lens – unfairly.
Not necessarily, no. But, having yourself noted how tonedeaf his original plead for Sandusky was, it seems even more tonedeaf of him to go double-or-nothing and opine on yet another skeevy guy, now that he’s the proud bearer of the “loony pedophile defender” SDMB badge. Sometimes, now matter if you’re right or not, you probably want to just STFU if your life or that of another doesn’t depend on your speaking.
So my 2 cents would be for him to do something that seems positively alien to him and just… let it go. If only to wait for a good opportunity to whiteknight Polanski or Assange or something, I dunno :p.
Thanks for takin one for the team, Bricker. With time you’ll forget.
Jeeze-Louise, Bricker, where did you find the time? Don’t you have and guilty industrialists to defend? Or do you bill your time here as “research?” 
Don’t know what the deal is but twice over the last few days threads I’ve been subscribed to have disappeared from my subscription list and I only just now found out about all these posts (I suspect the culprit is iOS 7 which I love but sometimes doesn’t play nicely with the iPhone 4 I’ve been checking the board with today). Unfortunately I’m about to call it a night and have a busy day and evening scheduled tomorrow and it will probably be tomorrow night or Monday before I can devote more time to the thread.
I may also take you up on your offer of going to PM Bricker, as I’d like to hear what you have to say and to ask a couple of questions as well.
You know, thinking about it, maybe what we need is a designated Starkers…guy. You know, kinda like a liaison, or a specialist, kinda like that. Of course, somebody like that has to be someone of firm moral character! I would volunteer myself if it weren’t for that! But I don’t even have flimsy, ramshackle character.
And since Bricker has already kinda volunteered and performed admirably, well, there you have it, right? Firm moral character up the wazoo, as well.
Just a thought.
I can prove that’s physically impossible. Just need a paper towel tube…
I was thinking band name and I am right. Google only has 42 results for surrogate rectum, including the quoted post. Perfect for brand identification.
Wasn’t that what got this whole mess started to begin with?
[Quote=Starving Artist]
I may also take you up on your offer of going to PM Bricker, as I’d like to hear what you have to say and to ask a couple of questions as well.
[/quote]
You ought to be grateful that someone is willing to talk to your creepy fucking ass at all after reading what you wrote. Taken advantage of the fact that Bricker is willing to be your Partisan Big Brother.
Learn from these things and fuck off to some dark corner of the world.
Just out of interest, in how many threads would Starving Artist have to show “poor judgment and understanding,” and be “spectacularly” wrong, in order for his future assertions to be immediately dismissed?
If the number is less than about 500, then you should be able to understand why people don’t take him seriously.