Thought This Was Superb Analysis (Lidstrom v Bourque)

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Thought This Was Superb Analysis (Lidstrom v Bourque)

    There isn't a person that logs into Boston.com that cares what you think or thought.

    Everyone just wants you to go away.

    And you can take that to the bank!

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: Thought This Was Superb Analysis (Lidstrom v Bourque)

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

    There isn't a person that logs into Boston.com that cares what you think or thought.

    Everyone just wants you to go away.

    And you can take that to the bank!




    Five screen names so far and he hasnt understood it yet.

    Normally I'd suggest him to just get a life, when really, he should just end the pathetic one he has.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from mikzor. Show mikzor's posts

    Re: Thought This Was Superb Analysis (Lidstrom v Bourque)


    Lol, I love thread killer replies. Well done boys.

     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from pcmIV. Show pcmIV's posts

    Re: Thought This Was Superb Analysis (Lidstrom v Bourque)

    Hello Bruins fans.  I won't pretend to be some diehard (more of a Sox and Pats guy), but of course it is always nice when Boston teams represent.  Anyways this thread was linked to from the Pats forum as kind of a joke.  Now that our friend Rusty has managed to get himself banned once more it got me thinking that it was possible that his bannings weren't just the result of what he posted in the Pats forum.  You see no one over on the Pats board has ever actually copped to reporting him.  Of course they could be lying, but this is of course a puzzle that I thought might be worth amusing myself with during the doldrums of football offseason.  So what say you Bruins posters?  Have you ever reported Rusty?

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Chowdahkid-. Show Chowdahkid-'s posts

    Re: Thought This Was Superb Analysis (Lidstrom v Bourque)

    Post has been removed. Gotta love it.

    It's as if CliffordWasn'tHere. My wish came true.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from bostonfan191646. Show bostonfan191646's posts

    Re: Thought This Was Superb Analysis (Lidstrom v Bourque)

    In response to pcmIV's comment:

    Hello Bruins fans.  I won't pretend to be some diehard (more of a Sox and Pats guy), but of course it is always nice when Boston teams represent.  Anyways this thread was linked to from the Pats forum as kind of a joke.  Now that our friend Rusty has managed to get himself banned once more it got me thinking that it was possible that his bannings weren't just the result of what he posted in the Pats forum.  You see no one over on the Pats board has ever actually copped to reporting him.  Of course they could be lying, but this is of course a puzzle that I thought might be worth amusing myself with during the doldrums of football offseason.  So what say you Bruins posters?  Have you ever reported Rusty?



    i'm not 100% sure, but i think I might have once. I think he started a whole bunch of threads within like 5 minutes, and most of them were duplicates anyway so i reported spam. either that or i really wanted to but didn't.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Thought This Was Superb Analysis (Lidstrom v Bourque)

    I can't speak for anyone else but I've never considered reporting anybody. As far as old Rusty, I find the bulk of his posts to be silly but not offensive in any way. 


    "wow,check out all of the losers in here......"

    -Gerry Dee
     

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from red75. Show red75's posts

    Re: Thought This Was Superb Analysis (Lidstrom v Bourque)

    In response to pcmIV's comment:

    Hello Bruins fans.  I won't pretend to be some diehard (more of a Sox and Pats guy), but of course it is always nice when Boston teams represent.  Anyways this thread was linked to from the Pats forum as kind of a joke.  Now that our friend Rusty has managed to get himself banned once more it got me thinking that it was possible that his bannings weren't just the result of what he posted in the Pats forum.  You see no one over on the Pats board has ever actually copped to reporting him.  Of course they could be lying, but this is of course a puzzle that I thought might be worth amusing myself with during the doldrums of football offseason.  So what say you Bruins posters?  Have you ever reported Rusty?



    He went all homophobic on me once - only time I've bothered reporting him cause he went way past the line. Usually I just ignore him.

     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from mikzor. Show mikzor's posts

    Re: Thought This Was Superb Analysis (Lidstrom v Bourque)


    So, anyone have any opinions on if Lidstrom was better than Bourque or not?

     

     

    Bahahahahahaha

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from lambda13. Show lambda13's posts

    Re: Thought This Was Superb Analysis (Lidstrom v Bourque)

    Dez, not even null?

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Thought This Was Superb Analysis (Lidstrom v Bourque)

    Seriously, who gets banned this many times...and keeps coming back?

    What a riot.

    What a loser.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Thought This Was Superb Analysis (Lidstrom v Bourque)

    In response to lambda13's comment:

    Dez, not even null?



    No, I just didn't see the point. I'm also lazy. That plays a big part. 

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share