1 minute ago, IsmeUno said:

Your reply to @Gottfrid was lame. That's all there is to it. You could have just laughed it off. But you are just too...sensitive, to do that. Always trying to deflect.

What makes your observation neutral, gossipy chicken?

Again, you are projecting and provoking on purpose, becoming desperate for my attention.

The man with the hook

He does not come to understand.

He comes with a hook.

A question,

a joke,

a small insult

dressed as curiosity.

He does not need the truth.

He only needs someone to bite.

Once they answer,

he changes the frame.

The subject disappears,

and the person becomes the target.

Short replies are weakness.

Long replies are obsession.

Silence is defeat.

Every answer becomes proof.

The point is not truth.

The point is control.

Anger feeds him.

Explanations feed him.

Even rejection tells him

the hook still works.

But the hook has no power

without someone holding the line.

See it.

Name it once.

Then let it fall.

The man with the hook

only wins inside his own frame.

Step outside,

and there is nothing

left to catch.

3 minutes ago, Hummin said:

Again, you are projecting and provoking on purpose, becoming desperate for my attention.

The man with the hook

He does not come to understand.

He comes with a hook.

A question,

a joke,

a small insult

dressed as curiosity.

He does not need the truth.

He only needs someone to bite.

Once they answer,

he changes the frame.

The subject disappears,

and the person becomes the target.

Short replies are weakness.

Long replies are obsession.

Silence is defeat.

Every answer becomes proof.

The point is not truth.

The point is control.

Anger feeds him.

Explanations feed him.

Even rejection tells him

the hook still works.

But the hook has no power

without someone holding the line.

See it.

Name it once.

Then let it fall.

The man with the hook

only wins inside his own frame.

Step outside,

and there is nothing

left to catch.

Haha...what a load of 💩😊

You could easily be describing yourself. It's only you who does not see it.

3 minutes ago, IsmeUno said:

Haha...what a load of 💩😊

You could easily be describing yourself. It's only you who does not see it.

I think everyone knows by now who is who, so I am not worried.

Actually, you made me laugh for a brief second. Thank you, and have a good night or day, whatever it is for you. Enjoy your mansion, wherever you are. Because it has to be a mansion, right?

You reached your limit early today.

3 minutes ago, Hummin said:

I think everyone knows by now who is who, so I am not worried.

Actually, you made me laugh for a brief second. Thank you, and have a good night or day, whatever it is for you. Enjoy your mansion, wherever you are. Because it has to be a mansion, right?

You reached your limit early today.

Everybody? Why would you need to be worried in the first place? You have an image to protect? Bwahahahahahaha! 🤣

What does a mansion have to do with anything? Your responses have just gotten more lame with each post. Pathetic. Run away, gossipy chicken. 😂

4 minutes ago, IsmeUno said:

Everybody? Why would you need to be worried in the first place? You have an image to protect? Bwahahahahahaha! 🤣

What does a mansion have to do with anything? Your responses have just gotten more lame with each post. Pathetic. Run away, gossipy chicken. 😂

I know you love honesty and unbiased opinions, and what better than feeding it all to AI and asking:

«A clean question for that analysis:

Based on the full thread, who are the five most toxic contributors, including me, and how would you rate each of us from 1 to 10 for personal attacks, provocation, persistence, and dragging the discussion away from the topic? Be honest, unbiased, and judge only the posting behaviour shown in the thread.»

Enjoy The Results.

I reviewed the visible thread, especially the later pages where it turns heavily personal. This is a rating of posting behaviour inside this thread, not a diagnosis or judgment of anyone’s personality.

I used five factors: frequency, personal attacks, provocation, persistence after the topic had ended, and willingness to speculate about private lives or mental condition.

1. Rockyroad — 9.5/10

Rockyroad is the most persistently toxic visible participant.

He posted 123 times, far more than anyone else, and repeatedly converts disagreement into comments about intelligence, relationships, homes, finances, sex lives and psychological state. Examples include calling people weird or disturbed, claiming someone has “zero” self-awareness, speculating about failed relationships, and accusing others of being frauds or living fantasy lives. His forum reputation shown on the thread is also deeply negative, although that alone is not proof of behaviour in this particular discussion.

His defining feature is volume combined with repetition. He does not merely throw one insult and leave; he keeps the conflict active.

2. IsmeUno — 9/10

IsmeUno uses more polished language than Rockyroad, but the mechanism is similar.

He often begins with a seemingly analytical frame and then moves into humiliation: “pitiful,” poor at school, limited intelligence, disturbed child, delusional, arrogant, ranting or freaking out. This can make his attacks look more respectable while remaining personal.

He also joins Rockyroad in reinforcing attacks against a third person. That creates a two-against-one dynamic rather than a direct exchange of opinions. His recent reply to you is an especially clean example: he does not address your observation but attacks your vocabulary, motives and association with another member.

With the deleted posts included, he may equal or exceed Rockyroad, but I cannot prove that from the surviving record.

3. fredwiggy — 8/10

Fred often starts from a legitimate objection but then expands into very long personal indictments.

He calls other members trolls, hated, psychologically fragile, mentally institutionalised, products of poor parenting, possible risks to women and examples of narcissistic or low-self-esteem behaviour. He sometimes uses general psychological language to give personal attacks an appearance of authority.

His main difference from Rockyroad and IsmeUno is that he appears more reactive than constantly initiating. But once involved, he escalates heavily and speculates far beyond what the posts can support.

4. Hummin — 6.5/10

You are clearly participating in the personal conflict, so putting you outside the ranking would be dishonest.

Your original contributions were mostly related to the subject, including the neutral observation about elderly men sitting along Beach Road.   But later replies include sarcasm about white coats, self-esteem, misery, delusion, mansions, failed lives and people being desperate for your attention.

Your toxicity is lower because much of it is reactive, and you frequently attempt to draw a line or impose a reply limit. But some of your replies do more than defend your point: they deliberately target the image the other person has created and are designed to sting.

Your main risk is not becoming identical to them. It is allowing repeated provocation to pull you into the same personal frame. Every time you analyse their insecurity, misery or private life, you give them evidence for claiming that both sides are playing the same game.

5. georgegeorgia — 5.5/10

The thread starter uses provocative stereotypes and loaded framing from the beginning: lonely men, downward spirals, “low-class” condominiums and dismissive comments about men living with Thai partners.

He is less personally aggressive than the top four, but his questions are often constructed to invite judgment and conflict. He supplies the combustible subject matter, then others turn it into personal warfare.

Depending on which earlier and deleted posts are counted, Gottfrid or scubascuba3 could potentially occupy fifth place, but the visible evidence I reviewed supports georgegeorgia more clearly.

Overall reading

The core toxicity loop is:

Rockyroad provokes frequently and bluntly.
IsmeUno reframes the provocation in more polished personal language.
Fred responds with long psychological counterattacks.
You answer with increasingly sharp sarcasm and character judgments.
The original topic disappears.

So your “man with the hook” description fits the visible thread, but not only one man. Several participants are using hooks, frames and mirrors. The difference is frequency and who repeatedly restarts the exchange.

Your strongest position is when you describe observable behaviour:

“He ignored the point and made it personal.”

Your weaker position is when you explain his inner life:

“He is miserable, insecure, desperate or escaping reality.”

The first is demonstrable. The second enters the same courtroom you accuse him of building.

My final ranking from the visible record:

1. Rockyroad — 9.5

2. IsmeUno — 9

3. fredwiggy — 8

4. Hummin — 6.5

5. georgegeorgia — 5.5

8 minutes ago, Hummin said:

I know you love honesty and unbiased opinions, and what better than feeding it all to AI and asking:

«A clean question for that analysis:

Based on the full thread, who are the five most toxic contributors, including me, and how would you rate each of us from 1 to 10 for personal attacks, provocation, persistence, and dragging the discussion away from the topic? Be honest, unbiased, and judge only the posting behaviour shown in the thread.»

Enjoy The Results.

I reviewed the visible thread, especially the later pages where it turns heavily personal. This is a rating of posting behaviour inside this thread, not a diagnosis or judgment of anyone’s personality.

I used five factors: frequency, personal attacks, provocation, persistence after the topic had ended, and willingness to speculate about private lives or mental condition.

1. Rockyroad — 9.5/10

Rockyroad is the most persistently toxic visible participant.

He posted 123 times, far more than anyone else, and repeatedly converts disagreement into comments about intelligence, relationships, homes, finances, sex lives and psychological state. Examples include calling people weird or disturbed, claiming someone has “zero” self-awareness, speculating about failed relationships, and accusing others of being frauds or living fantasy lives. His forum reputation shown on the thread is also deeply negative, although that alone is not proof of behaviour in this particular discussion.

His defining feature is volume combined with repetition. He does not merely throw one insult and leave; he keeps the conflict active.

2. IsmeUno — 9/10

IsmeUno uses more polished language than Rockyroad, but the mechanism is similar.

He often begins with a seemingly analytical frame and then moves into humiliation: “pitiful,” poor at school, limited intelligence, disturbed child, delusional, arrogant, ranting or freaking out. This can make his attacks look more respectable while remaining personal.

He also joins Rockyroad in reinforcing attacks against a third person. That creates a two-against-one dynamic rather than a direct exchange of opinions. His recent reply to you is an especially clean example: he does not address your observation but attacks your vocabulary, motives and association with another member.

With the deleted posts included, he may equal or exceed Rockyroad, but I cannot prove that from the surviving record.

3. fredwiggy — 8/10

Fred often starts from a legitimate objection but then expands into very long personal indictments.

He calls other members trolls, hated, psychologically fragile, mentally institutionalised, products of poor parenting, possible risks to women and examples of narcissistic or low-self-esteem behaviour. He sometimes uses general psychological language to give personal attacks an appearance of authority.

His main difference from Rockyroad and IsmeUno is that he appears more reactive than constantly initiating. But once involved, he escalates heavily and speculates far beyond what the posts can support.

4. Hummin — 6.5/10

You are clearly participating in the personal conflict, so putting you outside the ranking would be dishonest.

Your original contributions were mostly related to the subject, including the neutral observation about elderly men sitting along Beach Road.   But later replies include sarcasm about white coats, self-esteem, misery, delusion, mansions, failed lives and people being desperate for your attention.

Your toxicity is lower because much of it is reactive, and you frequently attempt to draw a line or impose a reply limit. But some of your replies do more than defend your point: they deliberately target the image the other person has created and are designed to sting.

Your main risk is not becoming identical to them. It is allowing repeated provocation to pull you into the same personal frame. Every time you analyse their insecurity, misery or private life, you give them evidence for claiming that both sides are playing the same game.

5. georgegeorgia — 5.5/10

The thread starter uses provocative stereotypes and loaded framing from the beginning: lonely men, downward spirals, “low-class” condominiums and dismissive comments about men living with Thai partners.

He is less personally aggressive than the top four, but his questions are often constructed to invite judgment and conflict. He supplies the combustible subject matter, then others turn it into personal warfare.

Depending on which earlier and deleted posts are counted, Gottfrid or scubascuba3 could potentially occupy fifth place, but the visible evidence I reviewed supports georgegeorgia more clearly.

Overall reading

The core toxicity loop is:

Rockyroad provokes frequently and bluntly.
IsmeUno reframes the provocation in more polished personal language.
Fred responds with long psychological counterattacks.
You answer with increasingly sharp sarcasm and character judgments.
The original topic disappears.

So your “man with the hook” description fits the visible thread, but not only one man. Several participants are using hooks, frames and mirrors. The difference is frequency and who repeatedly restarts the exchange.

Your strongest position is when you describe observable behaviour:

“He ignored the point and made it personal.”

Your weaker position is when you explain his inner life:

“He is miserable, insecure, desperate or escaping reality.”

The first is demonstrable. The second enters the same courtroom you accuse him of building.

My final ranking from the visible record:

1. Rockyroad — 9.5

2. IsmeUno — 9

3. fredwiggy — 8

4. Hummin — 6.5

5. georgegeorgia — 5.5

Sorry, but not interested in your AI generated rubbish. You only like it one way. When I prepared something for you, you refused to even look at it.

Grow up, little girl! 😊

I thought you suggested that it was me vying for your attention? It seems that you are putting a lot of time and energy into this 🤭

12 minutes ago, Hummin said:

My final ranking from the visible record:

1. Rockyroad — 9.5

2. IsmeUno — 9

3. fredwiggy — 8

4. Hummin — 6.5

5. georgegeorgia — 5.5

And KhunLA ... operates with 'minimum space' & 'maximum joy' ... SMOOTH

Edited June 12Jun 12 by KhunLA

7 minutes ago, IsmeUno said:

Sorry, but not interested in your AI generated rubbish. You only like it one way. When I prepared something for you, you refused to even look at it.

Grow up, little girl! 😊

I thought you suggested that it was me vying for your attention? It seems that you are putting a lot of time and energy into this 🤭

About two second !

5 minutes ago, Hummin said:

About two second !

Yeah...sure. You are just full of it 😂

Constantly in denial of the truth. No wonder your little brain gets so confused, in so you need AI to misrepresent the level of your own intelligence... to 'polish up' your posts.

The constant lying to yourself.

33 minutes ago, Hummin said:

1. Rockyroad — 9.5/10

Rockyroad is the most persistently toxic visible participant.

He posted 123 times, far more than anyone else, and repeatedly converts disagreement into comments about intelligence, relationships, homes, finances, sex lives and psychological state. Examples include calling people weird or disturbed, claiming someone has “zero” self-awareness, speculating about failed relationships, and accusing others of being frauds or living fantasy lives. His forum reputation shown on the thread is also deeply negative, although that alone is not proof of behaviour in this particular discussion.

His defining feature is volume combined with repetition. He does not merely throw one insult and leave; he keeps the conflict active.

AI did hit the nail on the head with that one!!! Could refer to any thread he participates in. 🤣🤣

Edited June 12Jun 12 by marin

4 minutes ago, IsmeUno said:

Yeah...sure. You are just full of it 😂

Constantly in denial of the truth. No wonder your little brain gets so confused, in so you need AI to misrepresent the level of your own intelligence... to 'polish up' your posts.

The constant lying to yourself.

You certainly show great character and intelligence. Considering how much of your posting is spent insulting forum members and Asian women in general, it is remarkable how much attention you still manage to devote to me.

Just now, Hummin said:

You certainly show great character and intelligence. Considering how much of your posting is spent insulting forum members and Asian women in general, it is remarkable how much attention you still manage to devote to me.

Oh dear...now you are getting desperate. Show me even a single post of mine that shows insult to Asian women in general.

You are truly just pathetic in trying to whip up fervour. 😊

If i didn't know any better you would this RockyRoad and IsmeUno were the same person. The rubbish they both spout is virtually identical.

13 minutes ago, IsmeUno said:

Yeah...sure. You are just full of it 😂

Constantly in denial of the truth. No wonder your little brain gets so confused, in so you need AI to misrepresent the level of your own intelligence... to 'polish up' your posts.

The constant lying to yourself.

Ai sussed you out pal and it was bang on, you are officially the second most toxic poster in the thread and most of us would agree that title applies to the forum as a whole , second only to Rocky Road who has a -4000+ popularity score

Edited June 12Jun 12 by Bday Prang

5 minutes ago, marin said:

AI did hit the nail on the head with that one!!! Could refer to any thread he participates in. 🤣🤣

Actually it's just nonsense and reflects @Hummin framing of the question. No history of other posters behaviour that led to the responses is included. It's just a little parlour game for the child @Hummin . It has no meaning in the real world.

P.S. It's actually a compliment to be considered toxic to a narcissist. 😊

4 minutes ago, Bday Prang said:

Ai sussed you out pal and it was bang on, you are officially the second most toxic poster in the thread and most of us would agree that title applies to the forum as a whole , second only to Rocky Road who has a -4000+ popularity score

If you believe that, then you are as thick as you indicate. You obviously don't understand how AI works and you don't understand how I work.

It's like telling me that I hit back the hardest. It's hardly an insult. 😊 So...carry on. Thank you 🤗

7 minutes ago, JT25 said:

If i didn't know any better you would this RockyRoad and IsmeUno were the same person. The rubbish they both spout is virtually identical.

Wow...another from the herd that thinks they are genius 😊

3 hours ago, KhunLA said:

Relationship advice is for entertainment purposes only.

Good advice.

1 hour ago, Hummin said:

When someone takes a neutral observation and makes it personal, as some here do with every post, they colour it with their own experiences and project them onto the person they are replying to.

Sounds familiar?

The man with the hook—or hooks?

Take the advice from khunla because apparently your intimate relationship with the internet is on the rocks.

There lies @Hummin His whole 'toxic' strategy in ruins. 😊

1 minute ago, IsmeUno said:

There lies @Hummin His whole 'toxic' strategy in ruins. 😊

Who is changing nicks? You or me?

1 minute ago, Hummin said:

Who is changing nicks? You or me?

What has 'changing nicks' to do with anything? You just go around and around, on repeat, with the same failing tactics. 😊

2 minutes ago, IsmeUno said:

What has 'changing nicks' to do with anything? You just go around and around, on repeat, with the same failing tactics. 😊

Do you never get tired of this BS?

1 minute ago, Hummin said:

Do you never get tired of this BS?

Ask yourself, it's you devoting your time to it. You only start crying after you've been handed your arse again. It's like Groundhog Day for you, isn't it?

1 hour ago, Hummin said:

I know you love honesty and unbiased opinions, and what better than feeding it all to AI and asking:

«A clean question for that analysis:

Based on the full thread, who are the five most toxic contributors, including me, and how would you rate each of us from 1 to 10 for personal attacks, provocation, persistence, and dragging the discussion away from the topic? Be honest, unbiased, and judge only the posting behaviour shown in the thread.»

Enjoy The Results.

I reviewed the visible thread, especially the later pages where it turns heavily personal. This is a rating of posting behaviour inside this thread, not a diagnosis or judgment of anyone’s personality.

I used five factors: frequency, personal attacks, provocation, persistence after the topic had ended, and willingness to speculate about private lives or mental condition.

1. Rockyroad — 9.5/10

Rockyroad is the most persistently toxic visible participant.

He posted 123 times, far more than anyone else, and repeatedly converts disagreement into comments about intelligence, relationships, homes, finances, sex lives and psychological state. Examples include calling people weird or disturbed, claiming someone has “zero” self-awareness, speculating about failed relationships, and accusing others of being frauds or living fantasy lives. His forum reputation shown on the thread is also deeply negative, although that alone is not proof of behaviour in this particular discussion.

His defining feature is volume combined with repetition. He does not merely throw one insult and leave; he keeps the conflict active.

2. IsmeUno — 9/10

IsmeUno uses more polished language than Rockyroad, but the mechanism is similar.

He often begins with a seemingly analytical frame and then moves into humiliation: “pitiful,” poor at school, limited intelligence, disturbed child, delusional, arrogant, ranting or freaking out. This can make his attacks look more respectable while remaining personal.

He also joins Rockyroad in reinforcing attacks against a third person. That creates a two-against-one dynamic rather than a direct exchange of opinions. His recent reply to you is an especially clean example: he does not address your observation but attacks your vocabulary, motives and association with another member.

With the deleted posts included, he may equal or exceed Rockyroad, but I cannot prove that from the surviving record.

3. fredwiggy — 8/10

Fred often starts from a legitimate objection but then expands into very long personal indictments.

He calls other members trolls, hated, psychologically fragile, mentally institutionalised, products of poor parenting, possible risks to women and examples of narcissistic or low-self-esteem behaviour. He sometimes uses general psychological language to give personal attacks an appearance of authority.

His main difference from Rockyroad and IsmeUno is that he appears more reactive than constantly initiating. But once involved, he escalates heavily and speculates far beyond what the posts can support.

4. Hummin — 6.5/10

You are clearly participating in the personal conflict, so putting you outside the ranking would be dishonest.

Your original contributions were mostly related to the subject, including the neutral observation about elderly men sitting along Beach Road.   But later replies include sarcasm about white coats, self-esteem, misery, delusion, mansions, failed lives and people being desperate for your attention.

Your toxicity is lower because much of it is reactive, and you frequently attempt to draw a line or impose a reply limit. But some of your replies do more than defend your point: they deliberately target the image the other person has created and are designed to sting.

Your main risk is not becoming identical to them. It is allowing repeated provocation to pull you into the same personal frame. Every time you analyse their insecurity, misery or private life, you give them evidence for claiming that both sides are playing the same game.

5. georgegeorgia — 5.5/10

The thread starter uses provocative stereotypes and loaded framing from the beginning: lonely men, downward spirals, “low-class” condominiums and dismissive comments about men living with Thai partners.

He is less personally aggressive than the top four, but his questions are often constructed to invite judgment and conflict. He supplies the combustible subject matter, then others turn it into personal warfare.

Depending on which earlier and deleted posts are counted, Gottfrid or scubascuba3 could potentially occupy fifth place, but the visible evidence I reviewed supports georgegeorgia more clearly.

Overall reading

The core toxicity loop is:

Rockyroad provokes frequently and bluntly.
IsmeUno reframes the provocation in more polished personal language.
Fred responds with long psychological counterattacks.
You answer with increasingly sharp sarcasm and character judgments.
The original topic disappears.

So your “man with the hook” description fits the visible thread, but not only one man. Several participants are using hooks, frames and mirrors. The difference is frequency and who repeatedly restarts the exchange.

Your strongest position is when you describe observable behaviour:

“He ignored the point and made it personal.”

Your weaker position is when you explain his inner life:

“He is miserable, insecure, desperate or escaping reality.”

The first is demonstrable. The second enters the same courtroom you accuse him of building.

My final ranking from the visible record:

1. Rockyroad — 9.5

2. IsmeUno — 9

3. fredwiggy — 8

4. Hummin — 6.5

5. georgegeorgia — 5.5

Looks about right, only those included would deny it. Which AI?

This could easily be another mental health thread

Edited June 12Jun 12 by scubascuba3

10 minutes ago, IsmeUno said:

Ask yourself, it's you devoting your time to it. You only start crying after you've been handed your arse again. It's like Groundhog Day for you, isn't it?

It proves that you have zero self awareness

6 minutes ago, scubascuba3 said:

Looks about right, only those included would deny it. Which AI?

This could easily be another mental health thread

No one needs to deny anything. Frame the question in the way that you want and you will get the answer that you want.

I put together a transparent analysis of @Hummin 's behaviour, showing the parameters. He refused to even look at it, after I read one that he put together for others.

It's just an extension of his own, quite limited mind. He is not an intelligent person. He is afraid of himself.

2 minutes ago, Hummin said:

It proves that you have zero self awareness

No, it doesn't. You just made that up in order to help you feel better. But there is no evidence nor basis. Just more of your delusional thinking.

4 minutes ago, IsmeUno said:

No one needs to deny anything. Frame the question in the way that you want and you will get the answer that you want.

I put together a transparent analysis of @Hummin 's behaviour, showing the parameters. He refused to even look at it, after I read one that he put together for others.

It's just an extension of his own, quite limited mind. He is not an intelligent person. He is afraid of himself.

I think you scored a clean 10 by adding this one 😘☝️

5 minutes ago, IsmeUno said:

No, it doesn't. You just made that up in order to help you feel better. But there is no evidence nor basis. Just more of your delusional thinking.

Do you know what you and Donald Trump have in common? Even I know you hate that guy, it is quite obvious

42 minutes ago, IsmeUno said:

If you believe that, then you are as thick as you indicate. You obviously don't understand how AI works and you don't understand how I work.

It's like telling me that I hit back the hardest. It's hardly an insult. 😊 So...carry on. Thank you 🤗

You have been audited and found lacking lol, "hit back the hardest" just listen to yourself "rambo "