I tried smoking pork once. Couldn’t get the damn snout to light.
Actually, although I haven’t had pork sushi, raw chicken is not uncommon here in Japan.
I’ll throw my vote with the “the OP missed badly” crowd.
Idiot.
You’re supposed to mix it 50/50 with tobacco.
Right, Mangetout. And forget about rolling it in a joint – you need the width of a pipe bowl to get a proper burn going.
Not that I’d* ever…
:smack: Ahhhhh… No, I wasn’t experimenting with it. Not at all. Why do you ask? :smack:
See what happens when you smoke funny stuff? The paranoia sets in: even BEFORE someone asked, EddyTeddyFreddy was offering explanations!!
We’re watching your mind Eddy. Just be careful…very careful dude.
It does make it easier to carve though, with the bone removed; I quite often do this for Sunday lunch, but I never inhale.
What a great idea! Thanks, I was trying to find a new business that danced on the edge of merely sleazy and outright mail fraud. 
Then Coldfire engaged in a little revisionism:
Now, maybe Coldfire interpreted my statement as saying that I did not think he was correct, but that’s neither what I said nor what I meant, and for Coldfire to present his interpretation as to what I said my actual words was rather dishonest, especially since he never corrected himself. And maybe Coldfire meant to say that the interviewee was “absolutely right”, but that’s not what he said; he said that he had a point, and I disagreed. Interpreting my words not on what I responded to, but on what he meant to say is quite bizarre. Apparently Coldfire doesn’t see anything wrong with completely rewriting an exchange. And apparently the “don’t be a jerk” rule doesn’t apply to him.
Was that supposed to explain your OP, Ryan?
'Cause it didn’t.
“Message sent is message received,” and all that.
Esprix
The Ryan, you should know better than to post on Monday.
Thanks, since Manny stepped down, I’ve been waffeling about who to support in the all time most pitted Mod races. You’ve helped me make my selection. Gads the audacity of the man, attempting to interpret the words “I wouldn’t”!.
A word of unsolicited advice. If your words are so easily misinterpreted, it could just be a problem w/you vs. a problem w/everybody else.
Are you thanking Manny? Or are you referencing something completly different? Many people think oral sex is a good thing and your use of “stepping down” has the connotation that going down is equivalent to a step downward. I think you need to be more clear.
**Your use of waffles is irrational and non-productive. Please use a different breakfast item to pit, since it is well known waffles contain no pit, be the “mod” or old-fashion.
** The interpretation of words is beyond most people on this board. Should I assume you think that Coldfire is in possesion of ‘gads’? As is clear with this Merriam Webster definition, your distate of oral sex is blinding you.
The only soliciting is being done by you, wring. As is amply demonstrated by your above love of Gads and repulsion to oral sex.
DAmn! that was good!!
(was it good for you, too, Biggirl )
The Ryan, your problem is that you are incapable of communicating in the Queen’s fucking English. And that observation’s coming from someone who didn’t speak a word of it until he was 11 years old.
In the linked thread, I asked you a few simple and direct questions, to throw some clarity into the mix. As expected, you danced around the subject in your usual ritual semantics steps. You are not interested in engaging someone in debate - you’re merely interested in annoying the living fuck out of people by twisting their words, deliberately misinterpreting their meaning, and NEVER answering a straight question, even if the answer is limited to the most basic of choices: YES or NO.
In this thread, you offer more of the same. It’s as predictable as it is annoying. Your stupid semantics games put even Bill “that depends on what your definition of the word is is” Clinton to shame.
You’re a feckin’ idiot, and a liability to these boards.
No doubt, you’ll come in now and interpret the above words into something along the lines of me accusing your mother of engaging in sexual intercourse with members of the British Monarchy, or something. Go right ahead - you’re a laughing stock already. Might as well go off the deep end while you’re at it.
I indicate that I don’t think that someone has a point, you think I said that they are wrong, and I have the communication problem? If I say that someone doesn’t have a point, I mean they don’t have a point. What’s so difficult to understand about that? Why is it a “semantic game” to use words exactly as they mean? If I wish to convey the idea that someone has no point, how should I do so? “He has not tomato”? “His submarine is full of greased monkeys”? “Tree bark yellow”?
You reworded a quote to fit better with the evidence, said that he had a point, and when I disagreed, asked a question that was not at all supported by the previous discussion, and did so rudely, and I tried to explain that to you. I really don’t see how that’s “dancing”; if someone asks a question which appears to be predicated on a fundamental misunderstanding of my position, it is not a “semantic game” for me to try to get them to understand that. I was honestly trying to get you to see things from my point of view. Simply saying “no I’m not denying that” would have answered your explicit question, but would have done nothing for your implicit misunderstanding. Considering the furor you have shown me for not answering your question, I will ask you a question, and if you consider yourself to not be a hypocrite, I expect you to answer: had I replied with nothing more than “no”, would you have said “Okay, that clears everything up”? Would answering your question really have answered your question? Would it have told you what you wanted to know? I don’t think so. I don’t think you’re being quite honest when you say you just wanted a yes or no answer. I think you wanted a more elaborate answer, and even though my answer didn’t elucidate you, I still believe that going beyond a yes or no answer was what the situation called for, and I think that critizicing me for doing so is dishonest. So tell me. Was it really a yes or no question?
I asked you to imagine that you had said that someone had no point, and were then asked whether you thought they were wrong, and to think about what you would think in that situation. This is not a “semantic game”; it’s called “trying to get the other guy to see things from your point of view”. The fact that you think that me trying to put you in my shoes is a “semantic game” says a lot about you. Are you really that opposed to thinking about what other people’s points of view are?
This from someone who lied about what I said, and started badgering me about whether I held a position which I had never indicated I held. Here’s an obvious tip for the day: if you’re actually interested in having someone “engage you in debate”, it might be a good idea not to insult them right off the bat and indicate to them that you will dismiss anything they say. When you’re rude to someone, it should come as no surprise to you that they are not interested in having a debate, and having your questions answered, no how simple the answer may be, is hardly a divine right, especially when you’re acting like an asshole. This is the point I was trying to make in that thread: considering me to be a jerk is a self-fulfilling prophecy. If don’t honestly listen to what I’m saying of course it’s going to sound like I’m playing “semantic games”.
If you’re going to expect that I clear up your confusion for you, all I ask is that you do so politely, and wait until after I give you my answer to start criticizing it. If you had acted respectfully and politely, and had honestly been trying to bring “clarity”, as you claim, and I had brushed you off, I could understand your anger. But whatever you think about my past behavior, if there is an honest bone in your body you must admit that in this case, it was you that initiated hostilities. In this particular case, it was not me that started the personal attacks. Whatever evidence you think there is of me not being interested in honest debate, the O’Reilly thread simply is not valid.
And if I did ask you whether that was the meaning of your post, would you feel obligated to clarify your post? That’s what you did to me: you took a completely unsupported interpretation of my post, and then threw a hissy fit when I didn’t respond to it to your satisfaction. There’s a certain irony in a thread complaining about a guy who insults and yells at his guests, of a moderator insulting, yelling, and completely losing it. That last rambling, wildly inaccurate, code abusing post of yours is worthy of O’Reilly or the author of the TimeCube. “I don’t have any support for my claim, so I’ll just repeat it over and over again IN REALLY BIG TYPE”.
It’s The Ryan hoedown! YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE HAAAAAAAAAAAAAW!
Esprix
Explain it a little more.
Then it’ll be funny.
The Ryan, you should also know better than to post on a Tuesday. Just look at that failed abortion of a post with which you have now graced us. On humanitarian grounds alone you should avoid posting on any day ending with a “y”.
So it’s some kind of 1920s style meat?
(Sorry, I’m the only one who hasn’t done that one yet.)