Babe should make a comeback

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: Babe should make a comeback

    In response to Soxchemistry's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Sonics will keep policing the forum and be looking for anyone who agrees with Kim or Pike. He is terribly concerned about a Pike quorom or a Kim quorom or too many positive posters or any change in the forum negative atmosphere of the forum. Sounds like a "thought police" paranoia to me. He prefers the present quorom of trolls, pretenders, negative, skeptical, and childish posting.

    [/QUOTE]

    Pike, do you look in the mirror when u post? Then again, you've only said this hundreds of times before.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from SonicsMonksLyresVicars. Show SonicsMonksLyresVicars's posts

    Re: Babe should make a comeback

    In response to Soxchemistry's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Sonics will keep policing the forum and be looking for anyone who agrees with Kim or Pike. He is terribly concerned about a Pike quorom or a Kim quorom or too many positive posters or any change in the forum negative atmosphere of the forum. Sounds like a "thought police" paranoia to me. He prefers the present quorom of trolls, pretenders, negative, skeptical, and childish posting.

    [/QUOTE]

    That's laugable, and only you would believe such a thing.....and I doubt even you believe that, you're just deflecting attention from:     "Again, Pike, do you use multiple logins and, if so, why?  Simple questions."  You obviously do, why not admit it and explain why? 

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Flapjack07. Show Flapjack07's posts

    Re: Babe should make a comeback

    In response to BostonTrollSpanker's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    "Why do you keep bringing Kim into it? It's you I have been engaging. I believe that Kim is straight up. She is what she is, and doesn't play games like you. She just doesn't have any sense of sportsmanship"

    Exactly. I don't care for Kim for several reasons but she seems to be herself here and not anyone else and she represents her points of view well even if I have serious issues with her worldview. 

    Babe I personally detested but I can understand why some thought he was clever. I thought he was pretty mean spirited but one fact about humor is that mean-spirited folks can be funny, has always been the case. It's a lot harder to be funny without being mean. 

    Softlaw is a piece of work but at least he uses one identity at a time. 

    Multiple identities used simultaneously do more harm to this forum than any other factor, and it's not even close. As far as I can tell Pike is the worst for this, as he not only does it constantly but then makes baseless accusations of others doing the same. Unfortunately for us I'm not sure that Pike, is, uh, well let's just say I think there is a gumball machine out there somehwere missing more than a few pieces. It's the only explanation I can think of for why someone who hates this forum so much would obsess about it constantly. 

    At best, PIke is fighting a hopelessly absurd battle against the nature of how free flowing discussions work online. 

    Pike, if you are reading this, the best thing you could do for this forum is to stop lecturing other people, GET RID OF ALL YOUR BOGUS IDENTITIES, identify the one you are posting under and who you are, and we'll take it from there. 

    Not much of a surprise BDC booted you again, having conversations with yourself on a forum thread is bizarro.

    [/QUOTE]


    This entire post is spot-on.

     

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

    Re: Babe should make a comeback

    BTW, Pike, I'm digging your Jeff Lebowski-like usurpation of everything around you.  I use the word "quorum" in a post, and your next post uses the same word three times!  Hahaha, are you for real?

     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Babe should make a comeback

    In response to FenwayJimmy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Did this SamClemens take back his post in which he agreed with Pike on something? He then got scolded by the SonicsLyres fellow who accused him of being Pike. Should I add Samclemens to the list of aliases that Pike has? Please advise me since I like my list to be accurate and complete. Should Bellhorn be on that list also? I would hate to see this group become a quorom and be a threat to the forum since I love this forum very much. How many are on this list and how close is it towards becoming a quorom? What gives when a quorom is reached? Should Dottie be informed of this impending bust?

    [/QUOTE]


    aaahahaha.  Again with "quorum", Pike.  Soxchemistry has now started using the word "quorum" just after I did...and now Fenway Jimmy is using it too!!   Just a coincidence, eh?

    Have I ever accused SamClemens of being you?  I don't think I have, but am willing to be corrected.


    Again, do you use multiple screen names or not?  C'mon, don't patronise us....Fenway Jimmy, Pike and soxchemistry are obviously the same person....one doesn't have to be a linguist to figure that out.

     

     

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from SonicsMonksLyresVicars. Show SonicsMonksLyresVicars's posts

    Re: Babe should make a comeback

    In response to FenwayJimmy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    My recollection is that Babe predicted that Boston would not win 65 games one year and everyone expected him to admit that he was wrong when they won 93. He replied that he was right since 93 does not equal 65. Now to some nitwits that is "funny" but to most it is stupid. Then again the forum draws many stupid types.

    [/QUOTE]


    I think it was "Law" that once predicted 65 wins for the Sox a few years back but, regardless, it obviously wasn't a serious prediction.

    I don't remember the later "joke", but a) it's not funny, but b) it is fairly funny that an uptight, sad, lonely, sexless loser like Pike would remember it and, worse, obsess about it.

    But you, Fenway Jimmy, have only been a member here since 8 September 2012 so how in Sam Hill could you possibly remember that?  Aaaahahahaha.

     

     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Babe should make a comeback

    In response to FenwayJimmy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The word "quorom" was used because you were apprehensive about Pike building an Army and asked him if he was establishing a quorom. You were worried that Pike's Army of three was a threat to the forum while dismissing the fact that posters like Yazzer have armies of ten or more. Why not concentrate on Yazzer or Bill-806 instead of Pike?

    [/QUOTE]

    Your parroting of the word "quorum" under different pseudonyms within 10 minutes, Pike, was further, unnecessary, confirmation of what we all know.  No one is "worried" about you and your obviously bogus quorum....a Pike "Army"?  Aaaahahaha.  Only of sad, lonely, sexless clones....

    Re "Yazzer", "Bill-806" and your other hate figures?  Because you are, in my opinion and most/all others, the worst poster here....adds the least, detracts the most.  You b1tch and moan about posters that most people here are ok with....but it's you that most offends regular posters.

    Again, do you post under multiple handles and, if so, why?  It's a simple question.  Why won't you answer?

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from ampoule. Show ampoule's posts

    Re: Babe should make a comeback

    Personally, I don't understand why anyone would want to use different handles unless they only intend on irritating people.

    If so, if anyone suspects this, the easy thing to do would be to just scroll past them.

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. This post has been removed.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from SonicsMonksLyresVicars. Show SonicsMonksLyresVicars's posts

    Re: Babe should make a comeback

    In response to ampoule's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Personally, I don't understand why anyone would want to use different handles unless they only intend on irritating people.

    If so, if anyone suspects this, the easy thing to do would be to just scroll past them.

    [/QUOTE]


    Of course you are correct....and I look past it all....except for the hypocrisy of the patronising moron Pike.  It's just too tempting and too easy to mock him.

     
  20. This post has been removed.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from ampoule. Show ampoule's posts

    Re: Babe should make a comeback

    Fenway Jim,

    I really don't know your issue with me, but I truly will not be swallowed into it.

    I used the term 'Ellspuff' because I think Ellsbury is soft and I happen to agree with this assessment.  I also told you that I got the term from a Trotter/Softlaw post.

    For reasons unknown, you seem to connect the two.

    I have NEVER used anything other than my 'ampoule' identity and have no intention of ever doing so.

    So, this is my one and ONLY explanation.  If you so choose to correlate something more, it is certainly your prerogative . 

    I've posted long enough where many on this board may not agree with everything I say, but I'm sure that they also know I'm not phony about anything and don't need multiple personalities to enhance an ego.

    Best of luck to you. 

     
  22. This post has been removed.

     
  23. This post has been removed.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: Babe should make a comeback

    In response to SonicsMonksLyresVicars's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to FenwayJimmy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    My recollection is that Babe predicted that Boston would not win 65 games one year and everyone expected him to admit that he was wrong when they won 93. He replied that he was right since 93 does not equal 65. Now to some nitwits that is "funny" but to most it is stupid. Then again the forum draws many stupid types.

    [/QUOTE]


    I think it was "Law" that once predicted 65 wins for the Sox a few years back but, regardless, it obviously wasn't a serious prediction.

    I don't remember the later "joke", but a) it's not funny, but b) it is fairly funny that an uptight, sad, lonely, sexless loser like Pike would remember it and, worse, obsess about it.

    But you, Fenway Jimmy, have only been a member here since 8 September 2012 so how in Sam Hill could you possibly remember that?  Aaaahahahaha.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    HAHAHAHAHA. BUSTED!

     
  25. This post has been removed.

     

Share