Coincidentally, I’m looking at a list of my threads (I was searching for one to link in CS) so I can see roughly the percentage of my threads which are poker-related. Poker-related threads account for about 5% of them. Additionally, I don’t think I do much if any injection of my poker interest into non-poker threads and I don’t think I’ve ever posted about poker in an unrelated thread for the sole reason of getting people to start thinking about poker, knowing that my history of poker-related posts makes many people uncomfortable. And of course I don’t have a poker fetish.
I get where you’re going with the comparison, but I don’t think it’s anywhere close to being apt.
And I am not a poker loser! I’m quite a bit up over the course of my game, thankyewverymuch!
Idiots. EC is a TOP, not a bottom. He is a sadist, not a masochist.
If you’re going to make all these holier-than-thou posts about bondage, at least comprehend the subject matter at hand.
SADISTS would paddle. MASOCHISTS need/want/enjoy the paddling.
And if HE doesn’t mention it, why does everyone else feel the need to? I agree with the OP and thank him/her for the post. I agree, it’s a tired, one-trick pony. From people who don’t understand what his kink really IS.
He certainly doesn’t need to respond to every instance, that would get pretty tiresome. But, based on the link you provided, I don’t see that he’s prohibited from fighting his own battles in a thread like this. At best, that link was unclear on the matter.
I did not see the admonishing email, but I wonder if perhaps “he can’t respond” was less in the sense of “he’s not allowed to respond” and more in the sense of “it would be suicidal for him to respond.” Or maybe just, “it would be childish of him to respond,” suggesting that the initial baiting was equally childish.
And whether you ARE a poker loser or not is PRECISELY beside the point, as you’ve elegantly proven by rising to the bait to defend the CONTENT of the insult rather than address the LAMENESS of the insult (said lameness being Maureen’s point).
I’ve seen **lissener ** deliberately baited, I hadn’t noticed **EC ** being baited until it was pointed out in this thread. I have to agree with the Poster formerly know as Cthiax. This baiting is immature and the humor is usually weak.
But now he should explain what **Ensign Edison ** is from as **faithfool ** likes it, I assume it has a meaning?
This is the way I see it too. If a person gets admonished by the mods over a topic, putting their posting rights in jeopardy, it’s bad form to continually poke them over it in an attempt to force a response. We’ve seen it before in threads where a poster is beginning to crack and there’s a pile on that causes a full blown meltdown and banning.
Even that which is intended as gentle teasing gets old and fosters resentment. If that’s your goal, open up a pit thread, don’t try to sneak in a poke in other threads.
Star Trek. His location under his old name was ShiKahr (Spock’s hometown on Vulcan) and his current location is the Starship Excelsior, Captain Sulu’s ship.
Also ‘cthia’ is the Vulcan word most commonly mistranslated as ‘logic’, which means more like ‘reality-truth’, at least according to the esteemable Diane Duane.
The ‘Edison’ bit is a handle I use elsenet. And it sounds really spiffy. You can also call me Tom, or Ensign T. Alva, or Telsa’s bitch, whatever.
I don’t remember the exact wording (and to think I just deleted the email the day before yesterday…maybe it’s still recoverable).
Nope, it’s gone.
The gist of it though was that I was being jerkish, but not rule-breakingly jerkish, because I was tweaking you on a topic where you couldn’t respond. My initial reaction still stands. If I was admonished under false pretenses, then the admonisher ought to step up and apologize. But I have no expectation that it will happen, nor is it anything approaching an important issue to me, so I don’t intend to dwell on it here or elsewhere.
Buh? That portion of my reply was a joke. Perhaps you were confused because I didn’t tack a stoopid smilie on the end of it. I didn’t take Maureen’s post as an insult nor did I think she intended it as an insult, so your point here is kinda not one.
No, no. He wasn’t saying I was insulting you. He actually correctly interpreted my post as saying my bringing up your poker playing at all is lame. I had to read it a couple times, too
