Michael Ellis, stop picking your nose! You’ll make it bleed again!
Now you’re picking on the people picking on each other. Stop that.
Stop picking on Libertarian !
Thanks, Lynn.
This is like watching your grown siblings bitch slapping and wrestling each other down to the kitchen floor at Thanksgiving. It’s ugly and pointless at this juncture. Would some mod do a mercy killing and cap this thread in the head so we can move on.
Am I missing something here? Or is this as much of a non-sequitor as it seems?
Whatever the case, I think the “stopped taking his meds” accusations are completely insensitive and a bit over-the-top. Even if he has, it’s none of our damn business, and we should be sensitive to that, especially if he requires meds. C’mon folks, aren’t we supposed to be the compassionate wing?
Unless, of course, these comments are intended as genuine worry over another’s well-being. If that’s the case, I just think the worry could be better presented.
WWW, Lib’s comment was directed at Lynn for inaugurating the latest round of that particular rhetorical gambit. Although Lynn’s original remark was (I believe) offered sincerely out of friendly concern, the comment has since been used as a barb and a put-down.
[sub]FWIW, Lib, I look back fondly on many of our past civil, sane and stimulating discussions, and look forward to having some more just like 'em at some point.[/sub]
Xeno!
Great to see you back!
Well now, that was a pleasant greeting! Nice to see you, too! (I’ve been around, just not posting much.)
Note to self: inquire of Minty or Dewey as to the expense and legal complications involved in the process of disowning children.
Take it from me, it’s quite easy. And revocable.
Are they still permitted to follow you around and pester you for food and money?
Only after a 34 or better on the ACT.
Ok. Let’s see. Manhattan should apologize to sailor. I know that, you (dear reader) probably know that.
Still, I think it’s worth pointing out that sailor appeared to accuse Manhattan of lying about 4-5 times in a single post. Soon after, Manhattan obviously blew a gasket.
Quotes, from a single sailor post, all directed out Manhattan: "That is a lie. Not true. …Big lie. … Lie. … Blatant lie. Where did you get this information? Please provide evidence. "
While I in general applaud the, “Please provide evidence” bit (subject to constraints of practicality and in this case board restrictions) it sure looked like you were challenging Manhattan’s honesty. Which rather distracts us from the topic of your thread, doesn’t it?
Still, there are spiritual conclusions that can be drawn from this imbroglio: Just because sailor was being a dirty-rat-bastard, doesn’t free Manhattan from the moral obligation of apologizing to him. Whatever sailor did, Manhattan’s accusation (backed up with insinuations, IIRC BTW) was over the top.
The moral, boys and girls, is that you have to be extra careful with your words when you’re around people who are acting like dirty-rats. Otherwise, you may be obliged to suffer the humility and agony of apologizing to them, dirty-rat-bastards though they may be.
Oh and FWIW, although I’ve heard assertions of sailor’s misbehavior before, I’ve tended (in the past) to think they were overblown. Not so in this case.
[sub]Of course sailor could, at his option, retract the ad hominem component of his orignal response to Manhattan. Should that happened, flowbark requests an automatic retraction of the “rat-bastatd” label.[/sub]
That’s a bit unfair to Lynn. In that thread, it was me that first raised the subject:
I’m an excellent driver. 
It is of the utmost importance that the aluminum foil is folded longitudanally in relation to the magnetic axis. Otherwise, the ability to block telepathic waves is impaired, and unreliable.
I’m gonna let ya’ in on a little secret, Ray. K-Mart sucks.
And well spotted, Coldie.