This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

For Seaoat and Miss Z man

View previous topic View next topic Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

1 For Seaoat and Miss Z man on 3/17/2017, 7:46 pm

Hopefully the libs can contain their nasty attituded.

Spoke with Markle......he said....

"I sent several messages to Boards, if he's still aroundasking him to extend my sympathy and prayers to 2seaoat for his difficulties and especially the family of Z for their loss."  Sadly, no response.

View user profile

2 Re: For Seaoat and Miss Z man on 3/17/2017, 9:16 pm

Dying is easy so far. It will get much more difficult, but for right now I have never been happier. Losing Z hurt. He was so full of tomorrow, and I am convinced that positive attitude kept him going. I am happy because I have structured short term goals which require incredible hard physical work, and I do not give a hoot about my diminished capacity. The scrotum and penis filling with blood after my arterial plug leaked when doing four loads of sod, was an eye opener, but I am happy to report that little seaoat and the boyz have got most of their color back, and everything is working fine.

I am sorry to say this, I really wish Mr. Markle well, but it is so much better on this forum not dealing with spam. If people were coming on here selling tennis shoes and balloons, and nothing was done about it, I would have been gone years ago. It is not about political philosophy. It is about integrity and honesty. I just would not associate with a liar in the real world, and I certainly do not need somebody using spam to make a forum experience unpleasant. I will die like everybody here someday, and not one bit of sadness has to be connected to when I leave because unlike Z I fully expect what is coming and know the routine. Z was a good man. He did not want Mr. Markle banned. I did not want him banned the first time, but after giving him the supreme court case which clearly established that gross negligence in handling classified material was not a crime, and after explaining it five times.....he continued to lie. I am done with him. I hope he lives comfortably with his prostate issues, and I hope he enjoys his other forums, but I 100% agree with boards on the second banning.

View user profile

3 Re: For Seaoat and Miss Z man on 3/17/2017, 9:27 pm

You hold markle to standards that you don't hold the leftists here to. It's obvious... and for you to deny the same is hypocrisy... and by your stated reasons for supporting markle's second banning you should resign.

Take care

View user profile

4 Re: For Seaoat and Miss Z man on 3/17/2017, 10:01 pm

Please give me any forum member in the last five years who used the forum to spam. At the PNJ about 10 years ago there was a democrat spammer called Pensacola. He admitted he was a paid spammer, and mike eventually banned him. There has been Nobody doing that except those two, but I am open to you to show me somebody else......I am all ears.

View user profile

5 Re: For Seaoat and Miss Z man on 3/17/2017, 11:13 pm

The politics section is flooded with every dnc leftist talkingpoint that comes down the pike... including flatex propaganda and one entire thread that's little more than one poster pasting up youtube after youtube of inane leftist drivel. You really should give up the pretence of fair play... you're fooling no one.

http://pensacoladiscussion.forumotion.com/t26730-blah-blah-blah-blah-blah-blah-blah-blah-blah-blah-blah

View user profile

6 Re: For Seaoat and Miss Z man on 3/17/2017, 11:28 pm

2seaoat wrote:Please give me any forum member in the last five years who used the forum to spam.   At the PNJ about 10 years ago there was a democrat spammer called Pensacola.  He admitted he was a paid spammer, and mike eventually banned him.   There has been Nobody doing that except those two, but I am open to you to show me somebody else......I am all ears.


Pensacola is a nut job.....and he was not a paid spammer. He was too busy trying to get a worker's comp pay out. He screwed up by threatening doctors, threatening suicide and pulling guns on cops.  He went off the deep end over multiple local stories he injected himself into.

View user profile

7 Re: For Seaoat and Miss Z man on 3/18/2017, 12:14 am

PkrBum wrote:You really should give up the pretence of fair play... you're fooling no one.

I'm still waiting for someone to tell me who appointed you God to sit in judgment of everyone you chastise on this forum as to their fairness and even-handedness, or rather their failure to adhere to your holy definition of it.

View user profile

8 Re: For Seaoat and Miss Z man on 3/18/2017, 12:26 am

RealLindaL wrote:
PkrBum wrote:You really should give up the pretence of fair play... you're fooling no one.

I'm still waiting for someone to tell me who appointed you God to sit in judgment of everyone you chastise on this forum as to their fairness and even-handedness, or rather their failure to adhere to your holy definition of it.  

It was your and the other's judgement that created the issue. As in... there was no issue until it was created. Why y'all think yourselves morally or ethically entitled to silence another is beyond me. It's a shortsighted and dangerous group think... it'll spread and certainly be used against us all.

View user profile

9 Re: For Seaoat and Miss Z man on 3/18/2017, 12:57 am

PkrBum wrote:It was your and the other's judgement that created the issue. As in... there was no issue until it was created. Why y'all think yourselves morally or ethically entitled to silence another is beyond me. It's a  shortsighted and dangerous group think... it'll spread and certainly be used against us all.

Nonsense to say we are responsible for what happened to Markle.  He created his own demise thanks to his own behavior, pure and simple.   Look, Pkr, you are so entirely thick-headed on this it's beyond human comprehension.  You know I don't always agree with Seaoat but I sure do in this instance.  Markle was and is a deeply toxic personage, and his presence here, with his constant, mind-numbing, persistently lying spam from highly questionable sources, was nothing but destructive.  We are not the first forum to rid ourselves of a toxic member and won't be the last.  
Further, fretting about this non-existent "group think" thing sounds like paranoia to me.  You must be right in sync with all the tin foil hats in the Trump administration and their "deep state" fears.  Watch out!  You're being persecuted and surveilled!  It's sooo unfair!!
Good holy grief, man -- calm yourself down. No one's coming for you.

View user profile

10 Re: For Seaoat and Miss Z man on 3/18/2017, 1:15 am

This isn't about me. Trying to shift the point or assigning bs to me is simply your coping mechanism.

If flatex were banned by a Republican administrator for "mind-numbing, persistently lying spam from highly questionable sources" you would be screaming bloody murder. Yet you can't apply those same standards due to your partisan bias. I'd be happy with only one set of rules. Radical... I know.

View user profile

11 Re: For Seaoat and Miss Z man on 3/18/2017, 2:13 am

PkrBum wrote:This isn't about me. Trying to shift the point or assigning bs to me is simply your coping mechanism.

Ludicrous statement.

Look, you said, "It's a shortsighted and dangerous group think... it'll spread and certainly be used against us all."  Don't you include yourself in the "us all" that this supposed group-think will be used against?  

And trying to compare FT with Markle is a fool's game.  There IS no comparison.  She, unlike Markle, is willing to engage in actual discourse.  She acts like a real human being, willing to discuss and reason, NOT like a robot spouting spam in response to virtually every single conversation/comment.

That said, I'll confess I don't often read her non-mainstream-sourced articles beyond maybe a sentence or two (sorry, FT) -- but she isn't persistently "in your face" NEARLY to the extent that Markle was.  Get real.

View user profile

12 Re: For Seaoat and Miss Z man on 3/18/2017, 7:25 am

If flatex were banned by a Republican administrator for "mind-numbing, persistently lying spam from highly questionable sources" you would be screaming bloody murder.

No, if Flatex was a spammer, I would not scream and would rejoice cleaning up a mess. You are not understanding a very simple concept. The person that posts spam about tennis shoes or frying pans on a forum is not here to discuss or interact with the people who are members of the forum......they are here to sell something. It is not the content of what they are selling, but the constant ads they post not for interaction, but for the purpose to sell their spam. Flatex is here to discuss politics, but more importantly other non political issues. She constantly posts threads which have nothing to do with politics. Mr. Markle went almost eight years without posting non political threads because he was spamming not discussing. After, I think I correctly pointed this out, he started about six threads on the general discussion. Yes, when Flatex talks about President Bush she uses highly political slanted sites. When Z talked about banking he used highly slanted sites. When I talk about the Bulls, I approach it from a highly slanted mind set. Mr. Markle did not. He simply was selling spam which had an agenda, yes......one which you apparently agree, but the content was secondary to the fact he was selling spam here. No other forum member did the same thing. NOBODY.

View user profile

13 Re: For Seaoat and Miss Z man on 3/18/2017, 8:19 am

RealLindaL wrote:
PkrBum wrote:This isn't about me. Trying to shift the point or assigning bs to me is simply your coping mechanism.

Ludicrous statement.

Look, you said, "It's a shortsighted and dangerous group think... it'll spread and certainly be used against us all."  Don't you include yourself in the "us all" that this supposed group-think will be used against?  

And trying to compare FT with Markle is a fool's game.  There IS no comparison.  She, unlike Markle, is willing to engage in actual discourse.  She acts like a real human being, willing to discuss and reason, NOT like a robot spouting spam in response to virtually every single conversation/comment.

That said, I'll confess I don't often read her non-mainstream-sourced articles beyond maybe a sentence or two (sorry, FT) -- but she isn't persistently "in your face" NEARLY to the extent that Markle was.  Get real.

The result of your group think will affect us all... just as the safe places on college campuses will. That doesn't mean I support it... doofus. It means that I and innocent others will suffer the consequences.

Why I had to explain that to you is beyond me. You have to know it... but ignore it for political purposes.

View user profile

14 Re: For Seaoat and Miss Z man on 3/18/2017, 8:23 am

2seaoat wrote:If flatex were banned by a Republican administrator for "mind-numbing, persistently lying spam from highly questionable sources" you would be screaming bloody murder.

No, if Flatex was a spammer, I would not scream and would rejoice cleaning up a mess.  You are not understanding a very simple concept.  The person that posts spam about tennis shoes or frying pans on a forum is not here to discuss or interact with the people who are members of the forum......they are here to sell something.   It is not the content of what they are selling, but the constant ads they post not for interaction, but for the purpose to sell their spam.   Flatex is here to discuss politics, but more importantly other non political issues.   She constantly posts threads which have nothing to do with politics.  Mr. Markle went almost eight years without posting non political threads because he was spamming not discussing.  After, I think I correctly pointed this out, he started about six threads on the general discussion.  Yes, when Flatex talks about President Bush she uses highly political slanted sites.  When Z talked about banking he used highly slanted sites.  When I talk about the Bulls, I approach it from a highly slanted mind set.  Mr. Markle did not.  He simply was selling spam which had an agenda, yes......one which you apparently agree, but the content was secondary to the fact he was selling spam here.  No other forum member did the same thing.   NOBODY.

You have no bias when it's what you want to hear. Shocking... someone alert the media.

View user profile

15 Re: For Seaoat and Miss Z man on 3/18/2017, 11:39 am

PkrBum wrote:The politics section is flooded with every dnc leftist talkingpoint that comes down the pike... including flatex propaganda and one entire thread that's little more than one poster pasting up youtube after youtube of inane leftist drivel. You really should give up the pretence of fair play... you're fooling no one.

http://pensacoladiscussion.forumotion.com/t26730-blah-blah-blah-blah-blah-blah-blah-blah-blah-blah-blah




View user profile

16 Re: For Seaoat and Miss Z man on 3/18/2017, 12:32 pm

PkrBum wrote:
RealLindaL wrote:
PkrBum wrote:This isn't about me. Trying to shift the point or assigning bs to me is simply your coping mechanism.

Ludicrous statement.

Look, you said, "It's a shortsighted and dangerous group think... it'll spread and certainly be used against us all."  Don't you include yourself in the "us all" that this supposed group-think will be used against?  

And trying to compare FT with Markle is a fool's game.  There IS no comparison.  She, unlike Markle, is willing to engage in actual discourse.  She acts like a real human being, willing to discuss and reason, NOT like a robot spouting spam in response to virtually every single conversation/comment.

That said, I'll confess I don't often read her non-mainstream-sourced articles beyond maybe a sentence or two (sorry, FT) -- but she isn't persistently "in your face" NEARLY to the extent that Markle was.  Get real.

The result of your group think will affect us all... just as the safe places on college campuses will. That doesn't mean I support it... doofus. It means that I and innocent others will suffer the consequences.

Why I had to explain that to you is beyond me. You have to know it... but ignore it for political purposes.

Hilariously incomprehensible post.  You're calling me a doofus when you have ENTIRELY missed the point of my own post, which is that you can't say something isn't about you (and your paranoid worry about "group-think"), when you've already included yourself (by using the phrase "us all") in the group that you believe "will suffer the consequences" of the supposed group-think.

Double doofus.

View user profile

17 Re: For Seaoat and Miss Z man on 3/20/2017, 2:52 am

Joanimaroni wrote:Hopefully the libs can contain their nasty attituded.

Spoke with Markle......he said....

"I sent several messages to Boards, if he's still aroundasking him to extend my sympathy and prayers to 2seaoat for his difficulties and especially the family of Z for their loss."  Sadly, no response.




See, if you need to do something just ask a liberal. Conservatives are helpless when it comes to doing things themselves.

View user profile

Sponsored content


View previous topic View next topic Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum