Jump to content

if a Thai girl who isn't a bar girl accepts money for sex....


ve741

Recommended Posts

Give a man a fish, he can feed his family for one day.

GIve a man a Thai women, he can feed his family for an entire lifetime?

I think i will never become immune to the talk of buying/selling female flesh, as if one were discussing picking up a pint of milk from the local grocery shop.

youre paying in the west as well.......and usually more for less in terms of quality ....

youre probably new here if you dont understand how it works yet but it costs money

to maintain any relationship ........when you get older you might understand .... smile.png

Nearly 10 years in Thailand and still young.

Doesnt cost me to maintain a relationship (financially), and never will.

I contribute, but no, doesnt cost money for me to maintain a relationship.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 548
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

All that pile of excrement means is you have observed that Thais often don't conform to YOUR view of "morality".

There's nothing wrong with taking money for sex, back home OR here.

Thank you for your very well formed opinion stated as fact. The reality is, that behaviors that are morally reprehensible- are morally reprehensible in all cultures. Guys like you have a vested interest in having access to cheap tang that's why you guys are the laughing stock of most Thais. They would never bring a hooker to their house- or tell her their name, phone number, etc. I full well expect to see you tomorrow parading around with a hooker dressed in 7 inch stilleto heels in the braod light of day. It's because your so cool! I can tell by the way you write. You have real gift for it! I wait with baited breath for your next words of wisdom- in which perhaps you will expound further on behaviors that "there's nothing wrong" with. Let me help you here, I think what you meant to say was, "There is nothing wrong with taking money for sex" as long as I am the desperate guy buying the sex for peanuts and the girl selling it is not my wife or girlfriend.

That would be bated breath.

And you're wrong, none of my SOs in Thailand have been sex workers for many many years now, and I never have gone for girls who dress up like that anyway.

And I have had wives and girlfriends, also blood family members, in the business, both back home and in Australia.

And there are MANY MANY (sub-)cultures around the world that don't take your neanderthal puritanical judeo-christian/islamic view of such matters equating "evil" with what consenting adults want to do with their own body.

Do you also think same-sex marriage is "wrong"?

Lots of people still think inter-racial marriage is "evil" too, or even divorced people, if everyone you knew believed that would you go along?

How about making moral judgments based on a rational system of ethics rather than what you were brainwashed with as a boy?

I gotta be honest with ya- I was expecting a better reply from you. Kind of ruined my Saturday actually. Giving me a "canned response" it's a bit patronizing actually.

You said, "And there are MANY MANY (sub-)cultures around the world that don't take your neanderthal puritanical judeo-christian/islamic view"

My "view" and that of the cultural participants in any given culture is kind of irelevent- I think it's rather the resultant conditions of particular actions and how they affect a particular society either adversly or otherwise. -but I guess that's not your concern is it?

Liberals tend to stay that way until they are affected detrimentally. If you want to remake society in your own image- you must realize there will be a cost, both to you and others. The short sighted thinking of todays smash and grab society has left more than one culture as just a short ink splot in a history book.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reading the bullshit about how all women are paid for one way or the other etc, is annoying.
Ie: you pay someone money for ANYTHING, be it sex, a service, or your milk from the 7/11, then that is a direct transaction. A clear transaction where you state what you want and you pay the amount in order to receive it.
In a relationship there is give and take, compromises and mutual benefits (or at least there should be).
THis means that if a man pays for something (in money terms), he is showing his partner that he appreicates what she does for him (and being romantic or sweet..pr sorry ..and blah blah ..lots of things ). In turn, his partner does things for him.
THis is called mutual showing of care, NOT a business transaction.
If you cant see the difference, then frankly you are lost.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reading the bullshit about how all women are paid for one way or the other etc, is annoying.

Ie: you pay someone money for ANYTHING, be it sex, a service, or your milk from the 7/11, then that is a direct transaction. A clear transaction where you state what you want and you pay the amount in order to receive it.

In a relationship there is give and take, compromises and mutual benefits (or at least there should be).

THis means that if a man pays for something (in money terms), he is showing his partner that he appreicates what she does for him (and being romantic or sweet..pr sorry ..and blah blah ..lots of things ). In turn, his partner does things for him.

THis is called mutual showing of care, NOT a business transaction.

If you cant see the difference, then frankly you are lost.

What if we called it, bartering, would that change anyone's perspective?

We are all, on borrowed time, at age 50+

How a person shooses to live there life, is at the core of the displeasure of one's lifestyle, opposite others.

We, who have had our marraiges, and have adult children, do NOT, under any circumstances want to be rooted again, you may as well chain us.

There is a different flow to people's steps at different ages and at different times in their lives.

This is less an argument about values and beliefs, and more about lifestyle choices based on experience and prior actions.

I like my way of doing things,for now, because it is more suitable with where I am in my lifespan.

3 years ago, I was with the love of my life, thinking I was done, it was over, forever is forever, then cancer, and psychoactive drugs and addiciton to pain killers (not me)

came knocking, along with the paranoia and talking to herself. Do you think I want a repeat of the stress I went thru trying to keep a drug and cigarette addict off her morphine and ambien while she is fighting cancer which is creeping towards her brain and liver?

The middle of the night nightmares alone, and waking up short of breath, screaming, gasping for air,

repeatedly from hot flashes, and bad dreams, is enough to keep me away from menopausal women for the rest of my life.

I choose women that do not want families, and that are not in a position to demand marriage, and that is how I intend to live, regardless of what trade she is in, as a necessity, as I cannot provide the security that most women demand, because, I have done that several times already, and its enough

but,

there is always a price.

always, a price.

thats not a transaction,

thats a fact

just because it is or is not money, changes nothing, there is always a price, and each person pays it, male or female.

I dont know how the females actually lose anything in this, but they pay a price too,

no one rides for free on this earth

Edited by Scarpolo
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always believe that a person's actions defines them best. Words, reasons, excuses mean nothing.

In this case, poor or rich, educated or uneducated, accepting an invitation to hook up based on a cash proposition says much about their integrity or lack of it as in this case.

Sadly in Thailand it is becoming a common value amongst women that providing sex and companionship for monetary gain is OK as long as its NOT done as a full time job (otherwise your a hooker). Sort of like the no harm no foul philosophy.

I'd stay away.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reading the bullshit about how all women are paid for one way or the other etc, is annoying.

Ie: you pay someone money for ANYTHING, be it sex, a service, or your milk from the 7/11, then that is a direct transaction. A clear transaction where you state what you want and you pay the amount in order to receive it.

In a relationship there is give and take, compromises and mutual benefits (or at least there should be).

THis means that if a man pays for something (in money terms), he is showing his partner that he appreicates what she does for him (and being romantic or sweet..pr sorry ..and blah blah ..lots of things ). In turn, his partner does things for him.

THis is called mutual showing of care, NOT a business transaction.

If you cant see the difference, then frankly you are lost.

Rupert is 83 Wendi is 45. Wendi has two houses now. One is worth $44 million in NYC and the other $20 million in China. Are the houses a mutual showing of care? What did Rupert get?

post-187908-0-37107000-1396674812_thumb.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you go out with a new girl that you have just met or have been chatting with online for a few weeks you are not expecting to get laid but it might happen. If someone offers money to a girl for sex and she accepts it is a sure indication that she has other ideas than just a normal relationship.

Directly paying for sex is what a lazy man or ugly man does to get laid. No effort required !!! Asking money for sex is also what ladies do who have no other marketable skills or have a low self image and worth. Keep in mind that if these ladies are willing to take money for sex now they may be also inclined to do so at any point in there lives. I don't trust ladies who sell their body just because they value money more that their own dignity.

But that's just the way I think.....I don't really care what other people do or not do as long as they don't bother me..... Live and let live ....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always believe that a person's actions defines them best. Words, reasons, excuses mean nothing.

In this case, poor or rich, educated or uneducated, accepting an invitation to hook up based on a cash proposition says much about their integrity or lack of it as in this case.

Sadly in Thailand it is becoming a common value amongst women that providing sex and companionship for monetary gain is OK as long as its NOT done as a full time job (otherwise your a hooker). Sort of like the no harm no foul philosophy.

I'd stay away.

And in the end, what are they truly getting out of it, a new car, a new iPhone, more cosmetics, whiter skin?

idk, Thailand doesnt seem like it is headed in the right direction, and a few years from now, all those balloon mortgages and zero down car loans, and high interest credit cards, are going to cause a disruption they are not prepared for, and, they do not have the systems in place to deal with it,

you think there is civil unrest now?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But I found exactly what I wanted to see in bed next to me, and I paid for it.

You're obsessed.

Ever heard of the term "holiday romance"?

Sorry to be rude, but you sound hopelessly inexperienced.

Yes everything is great and fun the first time or the first months you spend here. It's a lot different after 5, 10 or 25 years when you have seen all the bad stuff also.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This may be little sideways but it is true.

I go to HCM every month (not visa) anyway befriended a young chick that worked cooking street food next to bar I drank out. Each day she would take me here and there. Meet family. I even went to brothers wedding. Never laid a glove on her in over 5 visits over six months. Turns out she was a virgin. Trust me this ain't bullshit. Anyway to the point..she us calling me darling and "I love you" at this stage never ever kissed her. She gets $125 a month. She asked if I could help her a little. And I do. Not a lot. 2 or 3 million dong a month. Less than $110.

Would she shag me. Absolutely. Would some blokes here call her trash or whatever? Yes.

She is a wonderful lady . Some of you need to work for that money. I used to get tired watching how hard she worked. Oh and she gets ONE day off PER MONTH.

All Asian ladies will accept money from farang in one way or another. Get off their backs.

As the saying goes "walk a mile in my shies"

Any farang putting their hand up to sell sunglasses. Being from western countries empowers you but let us all, me included get off our high horses

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But I found exactly what I wanted to see in bed next to me, and I paid for it.

You're obsessed.

Ever heard of the term "holiday romance"?

Sorry to be rude, but you sound hopelessly inexperienced.

Yes everything is great and fun the first time or the first months you spend here. It's a lot different after 5, 10 or 25 years when you have seen all the bad stuff also.

Lars,

I left after 6 months, thinking I would never return to the US,

Now that I am here, and got out today a little (still adjusting to the heavy travel, weather changes and exhausting drive)

I do not see myself returning to Thailand, unless it is for a much shorter visit, in the weeks, not months, and even then, I do not want to return to bkk

I am a beach person, and do not want to be around the drunkards and yabba maniacs

If the south was an option, I would do that, and even then, I may prefer Ft Lauderdale over it all anyway, cant be sure,

I do know, I can live better and cheaper here, so for now, I stay, oh, and all the girls speak english and they don't have to worry about losing face, to date me

what a freakin farce that is

Edited by Scarpolo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speak English?? That's half the problem. Yes and most are educated in USA. . makes it even worse. You can have dinner somewhere and discuss politics and Obama care and all those wonderful things. Count me OUT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speak English?? That's half the problem. Yes and most are educated in USA. . makes it even worse. You can have dinner somewhere and discuss politics and Obama care and all those wonderful things. Count me OUT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speak English?? That's half the problem. Yes and most are educated in USA. . makes it even worse. You can have dinner somewhere and discuss politics and Obama care and all those wonderful things. Count me OUT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speak English?? That's half the problem. Yes and most are educated in USA. . makes it even worse. You can have dinner somewhere and discuss politics and Obama care and all those wonderful things. Count me OUT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speak English?? That's half the problem. Yes and most are educated in USA. . makes it even worse. You can have dinner somewhere and discuss politics and Obama care and all those wonderful things. Count me OUT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speak English?? That's half the problem. Yes and most are educated in USA. . makes it even worse. You can have dinner somewhere and discuss politics and Obama care and all those wonderful things. Count me OUT.

The beaches here are swimming in foreign women.

I will explore that in the coming weeks, but that is not my true purpose,

I just want to play music now,

I can always come back to thailand if I want a warm body next to me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Directly paying for sex is what a lazy man or ugly man does to get laid.

Ugly lazy men like Hugh Grant, Charlie Sheen and Tiger Woods.

http://www.ranker.com/list/celebrities-who-have-been-caught-with-hookers-v1/ranker-celebrities

Thank you.

Prostitutes are also the preferred of the rich and powerful,

My wife, as it turns out, used to always ask me for money, and I didnt give it to her because she had credit cards.

I wish I could go back in time, and see what I could have gotten; by the hundreds, taken away the credit cards, and, then seeing how she spent the money, she was "earning"

after all, she wasnt the mother of my children, and she only loved me for part of the 9 years together, where I tried my best, but eventually wound up telling her, after I stopped listening to all her crazed madness, that I was just going to keep on screwing her, until she left me;

which is pretty much what I did, right up to the last day.

I like the soap star better,

I find her more honest and less emotionally taxing, than my last wife

Edited by Scarpolo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bringing them to orgasm twice in 15 minutes, doesnt take a ton of pushups,

but it will cause them to scream, if you dont get off them soon after,

and will bring them back,

every time

You sound like a real stud.

Odd then, isn't it, that you flew thousands of miles to Thailand (because girls back home don't want you) and could only find a worn out hooker.

You'll fool lots of idiots on forums such as these. But you'll never fool the big boys.

Enjoy your little fantasy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bringing them to orgasm twice in 15 minutes, doesnt take a ton of pushups,

but it will cause them to scream, if you dont get off them soon after,

and will bring them back,

every time

You sound like a real stud.

Odd then, isn't it, that you flew thousands of miles to Thailand (because girls back home don't want you) and could only find a worn out hooker.

You'll fool lots of idiots on forums such as these. But you'll never fool the big boys.

Enjoy your little fantasy.

I went to Thailand for a 7-10 visit with one bag and a guitar, two pair jeans and three tee shirts.

I stayed because I met a 32 year old model, who works in a bathtub,

and worn out? She felt like 19 to me with the body of a 16 year old, and an amazingly positive attitude

you wouldda licked me right out her back side

Edited by Scarpolo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fer chrissakes, do I have to send you letterhead ?

I'm not quoting some dumbass ESPN doofus here.

No idea what your current location nor ESPN have to do with anything.

"When I was at university" sounds British and stuck up to an American who hasn't traveled much.

We generally say "when I was in college" even if it happened to be at a uni.

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/college_1

Note the second definition, which if you check out the meanings of the abbreviations, means "college and university are interchangeable terms in the US".

Want more or are you gonna fuggedaboudid?

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=college+university+%22are+interchangeable%22+OR+%22are+the+same%22

It comes as no surprise in the post-Bush era that there are still people who exemplify faux-bushwhacker speech patterns and designations.

So you may call me British and stuck up if it helps your argument. In another thread you suggested I was anti-British because I had a similar comment about yobs. It's all about feeling good.

So fill yer boots there, Wym.

For my part I am not interested in "what sounds British and stuck up" to an ill-educated, untraveled American ESPN hillbilly.

These are the bumpkins who will say that "usage" justifies just about any blurring of meaning and that linguistic abomination and lack of precision are one of many cultural ideals that "keep 'markins together."

The goofy "If I 'would of'(sic) known I 'would of'(sic) brought my own" comes to mind.

Along with the *signature* . . . . . . "he should of (sic) went (sic) home at three-thirty.

They had a President who faked this posture and look where THAT got everybody.

Educated Americans are quite capable of distinguishing between the two. . . . and they do.

Now, of course more people probably "went to calage" than went to UNIVERSITY and I'll grant you the "usage" point for that reason. I'm sure American Creationists and calage dropouts are enthusiastic blurrers of the distinction.

A University is a collocation of colleges on a campus.

In any case:

No one has EVER used Harvard "college".

It's "University" as is the "U" in UCLA and Stanford, Princeton, Michigan State, Texas A&M, Washington State (or ANY "State" University that anyone can come up with.

But you go ahead there, with "whatever".

"Sometimes, 'fuggedabowdit' just means fuggedabowdit. . . . "

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fer chrissakes, do I have to send you letterhead ?

I'm not quoting some dumbass ESPN doofus here.

No idea what your current location nor ESPN have to do with anything.

"When I was at university" sounds British and stuck up to an American who hasn't traveled much.

We generally say "when I was in college" even if it happened to be at a uni.

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/college_1

Note the second definition, which if you check out the meanings of the abbreviations, means "college and university are interchangeable terms in the US".

Want more or are you gonna fuggedaboudid?

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=college+university+%22are+interchangeable%22+OR+%22are+the+same%22

It comes as no surprise in the post-Bush era that there are still people who exemplify faux-bushwhacker speech patterns and designations.

So you may call me British and stuck up if it helps your argument. In another thread you suggested I was anti-British because I had a similar comment about yobs. It's all about feeling good.

So fill yer boots there, Wym.

For my part I am not interested in "what sounds British and stuck up" to an ill-educated, untraveled American ESPN hillbilly.

These are the bumpkins who will say that "usage" justifies just about any blurring of meaning and that linguistic abomination and lack of precision are one of many cultural ideals that "keep 'markins together."

The goofy "If I 'would of'(sic) known I 'would of'(sic) brought my own" comes to mind.

Along with the *signature* . . . . . . "he should of (sic) went (sic) home at three-thirty.

They had a President who faked this posture and look where THAT got everybody.

Educated Americans are quite capable of distinguishing between the two. . . . and they do.

Now, of course more people probably "went to calage" than went to UNIVERSITY and I'll grant you the "usage" point for that reason. I'm sure American Creationists and calage dropouts are enthusiastic blurrers of the distinction.

A University is a collocation of colleges on a campus.

In any case:

No one has EVER used Harvard "college".

It's "University" as is the "U" in UCLA and Stanford, Princeton, Michigan State, Texas A&M, Washington State (or ANY "State" University that anyone can come up with.

But you go ahead there, with "whatever".

"Sometimes, 'fuggedabowdit' just means fuggedabowdit. . . . "

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fer chrissakes, do I have to send you letterhead ?

I'm not quoting some dumbass ESPN doofus here.

No idea what your current location nor ESPN have to do with anything.

"When I was at university" sounds British and stuck up to an American who hasn't traveled much.

We generally say "when I was in college" even if it happened to be at a uni.

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/college_1

Note the second definition, which if you check out the meanings of the abbreviations, means "college and university are interchangeable terms in the US".

Want more or are you gonna fuggedaboudid?

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=college+university+%22are+interchangeable%22+OR+%22are+the+same%22

It comes as no surprise in the post-Bush era that there are still people who exemplify faux-bushwhacker speech patterns and designations.

So you may call me British and stuck up if it helps your argument. In another thread you suggested I was anti-British because I had a similar comment about yobs. It's all about feeling good.

So fill yer boots there, Wym.

For my part I am not interested in "what sounds British and stuck up" to an ill-educated, untraveled American ESPN hillbilly.

These are the bumpkins who will say that "usage" justifies just about any blurring of meaning and that linguistic abomination and lack of precision are one of many cultural ideals that "keep 'markins together."

The goofy "If I 'would of'(sic) known I 'would of'(sic) brought my own" comes to mind.

Along with the *signature* . . . . . . "he should of (sic) went (sic) home at three-thirty.

They had a President who faked this posture and look where THAT got everybody.

Educated Americans are quite capable of distinguishing between the two. . . . and they do.

Now, of course more people probably "went to calage" than went to UNIVERSITY and I'll grant you the "usage" point for that reason. I'm sure American Creationists and calage dropouts are enthusiastic blurrers of the distinction.

A University is a collocation of colleges on a campus.

In any case:

No one has EVER used Harvard "college".

It's "University" as is the "U" in UCLA and Stanford, Princeton, Michigan State, Texas A&M, Washington State (or ANY "State" University that anyone can come up with.

But you go ahead there, with "whatever".

"Sometimes, 'fuggedabowdit' just means fuggedabowdit. . . . "

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fer chrissakes, do I have to send you letterhead ?

I'm not quoting some dumbass ESPN doofus here.

No idea what your current location nor ESPN have to do with anything.

"When I was at university" sounds British and stuck up to an American who hasn't traveled much.

We generally say "when I was in college" even if it happened to be at a uni.

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/college_1

Note the second definition, which if you check out the meanings of the abbreviations, means "college and university are interchangeable terms in the US".

Want more or are you gonna fuggedaboudid?

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=college+university+%22are+interchangeable%22+OR+%22are+the+same%22

It comes as no surprise in the post-Bush era that there are still people who exemplify faux-bushwhacker speech patterns and designations.

So you may call me British and stuck up if it helps your argument. In another thread you suggested I was anti-British because I had a similar comment about yobs. It's all about feeling good.

So fill yer boots there, Wym.

For my part I am not interested in "what sounds British and stuck up" to an ill-educated, untraveled American ESPN hillbilly.

These are the bumpkins who will say that "usage" justifies just about any blurring of meaning and that linguistic abomination and lack of precision are one of many cultural ideals that "keep 'markins together."

The goofy "If I 'would of'(sic) known I 'would of'(sic) brought my own" comes to mind.

Along with the *signature* . . . . . . "he should of (sic) went (sic) home at three-thirty.

They had a President who faked this posture and look where THAT got everybody.

Educated Americans are quite capable of distinguishing between the two. . . . and they do.

Now, of course more people probably "went to calage" than went to UNIVERSITY and I'll grant you the "usage" point for that reason. I'm sure American Creationists and calage dropouts are enthusiastic blurrers of the distinction.

A University is a collocation of colleges on a campus.

In any case:

No one has EVER used Harvard "college".

It's "University" as is the "U" in UCLA and Stanford, Princeton, Michigan State, Texas A&M, Washington State (or ANY "State" University that anyone can come up with.

While we're at it there's also this crowd of IT mavens who call themselves scientists because they graduated from a computer science department. By THAT token then, so are secretaries (Secretarial Science) politicians (Political Science) Actuaries (Actuarial Science) etc.

But you go ahead there, with your "whatever".

"Sometimes, 'fuggedabowdit' just means fuggedabowdit. . . . "

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not really at odds with evolutionary theory at all in regards to the sexual superiority of a woman over a man.. Do you really think you can keep up with a woman who is sexually liberated to enjoy sex without all the societal BS running through her head? Physically you will be unable to compete sexually with a woman.. They can exhaust one man after another in quick succession or all at once.. Men may be superior in physical strength, but not sexual abilities no matter the size of their unit or libido!

As to being the 'driver' of monogamy, I agree to disagree. Any woman I have known as a guy in the rear seat just in case the one in the driver's seat doesn't work out - especially if she is pregnant or has a kid. Women I've known tend to get over a man emotionally far quicker than the other way around - nature might of intended it that way so a woman can move on quicker in securing the next provider for offspring. And again, if women are in the driver's seat of monogomy, it is because they were indoctrinated by the religious morals of a patriarchal society to believe monogamy is 'right' because the male image of the society's imaginary sky daddy says so.. Why? The human male mate wants to monopolize a human female, to dominate her by controlling her sexually superior abilities so that he can be assured he is the father of the children he then provides for. The human female is biologically no different than many other female species in that she was designed by evolution to mate with, and receive the sperm of multiple males, and often in quick succession.

Ever notice after child bearing years women start straying at a far greater rate than during? You'll find vast numbers of over 40 MILFS cheating on their hubbies at 'hook up' sites because they don't really want or need monogamy after they'd done their child rearing duties as mothers. If that's what you mean by being in the driver's seat of monogamy after coming to the conclusion she doesn't need it anymore, I'll agree wai.gif And by the way, at a statistical level, women are far more adulterous than their male counterpart boyfriends and husbands - at least in the US and I would suspect most anywhere in the world because they are sexually superior than their male counterpart.

Please tell me you're paid to post this crud.

Seriously, please.

What? If you read something crude, I'd say your a bit over sensitive about relationships and human sexuality - perhaps from your upbringing? Maybe you've been conditioned by your western patriarchal society to believe human sexuality is an embarrassing topic?.. It is what it is..

Oh wait - you said crud, not crude! Tell ya what - when you can make some valid point by rationally debating what was written rather than resorting to the meaningless forum ad hominem fallacy uttering 'crud', by all means go for it.. Or is debate beyond the utterance of 'crud' exceed your reasoning abilities? Try expressing your thoughts with reason, rather than unsubstantiated opinion.. You might learn something in the process..

I used to operate forums.
I employed lackeys (ie, moderators); I set up managed accounts (ie, trolls).
Do you really believe I can't spot someone like you a mile off?
You're going wrong because your fake indignation is way too fake.
Tone it down a bit and you might be a bit more convincing.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.










×
×
  • Create New...