You seemed to have missed my whole point to my last post to you... Please read carefully...

It has nothing to do with censorship... it's more on what you condone while supporting something YOU find repugnent.

Were you outspoken about Flint etal being banned from EZboard..?... so was I.... 13 posts to that effect if I remember right... Hell !!!!... I even said CPR should be allowed to post !!!!!!

It seems to be the "common sense" on this forum that if you condone something, you therefore "support it"..... from your attitude, you're speaking out of both sides of your ass.... that IS, if you know what I'm pissed about, and know what really happened.

Have a happy manipulation, and say Hi to Rhoda next time you see her.

-- Netghost (ng@no.yr), April 17, 2000

Answers

Unk always talks out of both sets of cheeks. His face and his butt.

He's a fuckin' loser/player so who gives a shit?

Forget about it Netghost.

-- (Deed@h Doo . Doo), April 17, 2000.

Deed..... Unk ain't the target... he's just a tool :-)

-- Netghost (ng@no.yr), April 17, 2000.

Unks off playing with his tool.

You should be doing the same.

-- (Deed @h Doo .Doo), April 17, 2000.

NG,

Does your/her/his/their personal matter affect the functioning or content (other than your posts) of this forum in any way? If not,

Why not take it to E-mail or SOMEWHERE else?

Frank

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), April 17, 2000.

NG,

You seemed to have missed my whole point to my last post to you... Please read carefully... It has nothing to do with censorship... it's more on what you condone while supporting something YOU find repugnent.

Why would I support something I find repugnant? Do you support things that you find repugnant? That statement makes no sense.

Were you outspoken about Flint etal being banned from EZboard..?... so was I.... 13 posts to that effect if I remember right... Hell !!!!... I even said CPR should be allowed to post !!!!!!

Hell, I think that LL should be allowed to post here, and Im not a fan of her body of work. If you are trying to infer that I support censorship, you are nuts.

It seems to be the "common sense" on this forum that if you condone something, you therefore "support it"..... from your attitude, you're speaking out of both sides of your ass.... that IS, if you know what I'm pissed about, and know what really happened.

My ass has only one opening

Have a happy manipulation, and say Hi to Rhoda next time you see her.

Netghost, you are the one who beat around the bush with the mysterious problem that you had with OTFR. Why? To manipulate and arouse interest among posters to the board. You aroused my interest. Now that I realize what your problem was/is I suppose that I should have let you continue with your six-month campaign of torture. And thats what has you pissed isnt it? Ive spoiled your fun.

Why you would want to have fun with a personal matter that does not concern you directly is beyond me.

-- Uncle Deedah (unkeed@yahoo.com), April 17, 2000.

PS, NG,

The next time you have a problem with someone just come right out and say it. That will minimize collateral damage.

-- Uncle Deedah (unkeed@yahoo.com), April 17, 2000.

Netghost:

MOST folks who were on TB2000 last year understand the story, but I'll spell it out for those who weren't here: Two anonymous posters on TB2000 began E-mailing off the board. One was female and married and the other was male and in a long-term relationship [although not married} to Rhoda. The female was worried about Y2k and had a husband who didn't understand her fears. The male, although engaged in a long-term relationship, felt that the relationship had been suffering for a while and a new relationship had appeal. They somewhat covertly made plans to get together IRL, but the male was caught. Rhoda decided to post on TB2000 to let everyone know of this scandalous "affair."

Once rollover passed uneventfully, the female decided to stay with her husband, thereby dumping the male who had already been "caught." The husband had never been a poster on TB2000, and Rhoda had never been a poster either. She simply wanted to see the anonymous male poster "suffer", and she continues to want to see the anonymous male poster "suffer."

Netghost purports that the female in the relationship is Old Regular. He seems to feel that the male poster was manipulated. He takes that further and suggests that if Old Regular is the female poster, she will attempt to manipulate others who post on this forum. He's particularly incensed that the female poster suffered no apparent ramifications in her relationship with her husband.

*I* don't know who Old Regular is, nor do I care. I chat several times/week with the male poster involved in the scandal, and although he kicks himself for being an old fool on occasion, he accepts the consequences of his actions. Rhoda has moved on, it seems, and found another man.

The only one who hasn't moved beyond this seems to be Netghost.

Both parties involved learned a lesson. The male learned that all that glitters is not gold, and the female learned that decisions shouldn't be made based on fear.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), April 17, 2000.

Thanks for clearing that up Anita. LOL! Like any of us care. There are tons of net relationships that are larger than life, but in essence they are fantasy or bad dreams. Live and learn.

NG -- why don't you take it to a bathroom wall in some shit hole somewhere? You've just delegated yourself to the Hawkites class of nutcases that love the last word, but fail to realize nobody is listening.

-- (doomerstomper@usa.net), April 17, 2000.

And it is obvious that Netghost is grasping at straws trying to discredit this forum so he can validate his own stupidity and doomer mentality over at Ezboard, with blessings and nudges from Old Git.

-- Another (oldtimer@in.the.know), April 17, 2000.

"The male learned that all that glitters is not gold, and the female learned that decisions shouldn't be made based on fear."

That's right. Some things that glitter can be flawed diamonds.

-- Another (oldtimer@in.the.know), April 17, 2000.

flawed diamonds

But, a diamond nonetheless.

~*~

-- (Ladylogic@...), April 17, 2000.

oh what a tangled web we weave

-- richard (richard@onion.com), April 17, 2000.

Can we change the name of this forum to "As the World Turns?"

-- soap opera (soap@operaa.xcom), April 17, 2000.

To Soap opera, and anyone else who thinks they have the right to judge OTFR:

I would like you to take a moment, and consider that the words written here are connected to real live people whose lives have been/are being lived in this forum. Some of you may never have made a mistake in your life, and think it's OK to sit in judgment of others. Good for you, I applaud you for living a life unlike the rest of us. I suspect we will see your name in history books along with Mother Theresa's.

For those of you who have lived enough years to make mistakes in your lives, and continue to be judgmental, I think you should consider this:

You probably covered up your mistake because it wasn't public. You probably "got away" with it, and never learned anything from your error. You continue to delude yourself into thinking you're better than everyone else and you have the nerve to bring your arrogance to this forumn.

One more thing I'd like you to consider before you brand OTFR with an "A" is that Y2K cracked a lot of souls, in a lot of different ways. People did things they ordinarily would not do, and as long as they weren't planning on killing, we should forgive and forget. If the healing doesn't start with the participants of this forumn, what can we expect from those in the outside world who think we're beyond help?

Go ahead throw another stone. You might as well be aiming at yourself.

-- (Burt @nd .Ernie and Dave), April 17, 2000.

To Soap opera, and anyone else who thinks they have the right to judge OTFR:

Where did you get the idea that "Soap Opera" was judging OTFR? I thought he/she was simply commenting on the silly "Soap Opera" nature of the whole situation. I mean who really cares besides Netghost and one or two anonymous trolls?

It was an admirable speech, Burt/Ernie/Dave, but I really think you're preaching to the choir here.

And thanks Anita for clearing up Netghost's little game.

-- (hmm@hmm.hmm), April 17, 2000.

Anita,

I can only say, "Wow." I wasn't aware of all the clandestine happenings. Did I miss the memo? Personally, I don't really care what other consenting adults do in their spare time... although it does amuse me to think of NG as a self-appointed moral policeman.

-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), April 17, 2000.

Thanks for clearing that up Anita - straight shooter that you are. Since I wasn't on the board in last half 1999, I was not clued in. Now all I can say is, "oh." - A lot of things happened in a lot of lives over Y2k, and lessons were learned through sometimes painful or mixed experiences, human, all too human.

Netghost - The only manipulation I see here is yours.

Ken Decker, you say it's an enjoyable pastime posting here and you have never lost a wink of sleep over it. That needs to be my standard, too, otherwise life is definitely out of balance.

Sorry I got caught in this negativity, it was just my version of truth telling, and how it comes out on a bad day -

This just confirmed for me that internet forums are not a good place to try to do personal growth and catharsis (although some seem to thrive on it). Live and learn. I was thinking of doing my own version of "Horrible Things I Have Done." Unc D, you made me laugh (and reflect), and after a bit the urge went away. I think I'm manifesting my need to move on. All at once or bit by bit, I don't know.

-- Debbie (dbspence@usa.net), April 19, 2000.

Anita,

Thanks for sharing. As long as I posted/lurked so forth, I never was abreast of the situation...Just goes to show, how uninteresting the saga was to me.

NG,

DOUBLE SHAME ON YOU!!!!!

those in glass houses ought NEVER throw stones.

----keeping my nose outta others peeps biz.....

-- consumer (shh@aol.com), April 19, 2000.