Are we going to let this be the 4th forum to close it's doors because of the rantings of this immature child? It sure looks that way.

Look at the top level. LL this. LL that. The longest thread on recent answers, asking if we "respect" LL.

This isn't about me fighting with LL. It's about what is happening to this forum. I used to enjoy this place. It used to be a good place to stay on top with world events. I was finally getting around to "making up" with some of my old polly "enemies." But now it seems that this has become the Lady Logic forum #4.

I suggest that we ignore it. Maybe it will go away.

<:(=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), May 23, 2000

Answers

" a good place to stay on top with world events."

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHA

AHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHA HAHAHAH HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAH

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAH HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAAHAHH AHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAH ha HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAH Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah ha haha ha haha

ha ha ha

ha ha

ha

World events? Like what? The New World Order? The crash of our economy? Ha, ha! Oh, I know, how about all the intelligent discussion about that pier that fell the other day.

Sissyman, you're stoned again tonight, aren't you?

-- (Ladylogic@...), May 23, 2000.

Can you spell

I - G - N - O - R - E

Laura? I knew you could. Bye bye now, and have a nice life.

<=====3

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), May 23, 2000.

Sysman-

Nah-we are just going to ignore her and hope she resumes her former/previous behavior of being an adult, and posting like one (as when this forum started). She was pretty logical and added good information to the forum for the first few months it started. If she continues to spam, we need to ignore her. Why do folks continue to give her ammo? Ignore the trolls, as always...

-- Aunt Bee (SheriffAndy@Mayberry.com), May 23, 2000.

Sysman:

I think there's a nice community here. It's certainly moved away from Y2k [about time, IMO]. I don't know that world events are discussed here so much as random opinions on this and that, much like one would find in a neighborhood bar/coffee shop.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), May 23, 2000.

Sysman,

Point noted. I have posted my first and last on LL. This has been an interesting forum. Maybe it can be once again.

-- Spindoc' (spindoc_99_2000@yahoo.com), May 23, 2000.

Sysman,

Like the old common sense parable/analogy states --

throw logs on the fire, it'll keep on burning;

let it burn on its own, with no further fuel added, and it'll burn out all by itself.

-- Chicken Little (panic@forthebirds.net), May 23, 2000.

LOLOLOLOLOLOL !!!!!!!!!!!!!... Might I mention LMAO ?... Just leave her alone... it will drive her nuts... sorry Laura, but you've been asking for it... :-)

-- Netghost (ng@no.yr), May 23, 2000.

It's not Laura's fault if people start threads ABOUT her (like this one). As long as she doesn't DOS us then, as an uncensored forum, she has a right to be here.

-- Lars (lars@indy.net), May 23, 2000.

Sysman,

How about a pic from you dude?

-- capnfun (capnfun1@excite.com), May 23, 2000.

Its really all in the timing...

L.L. bite me!

Hot damn! time to get on with it!

Whatever IT is????

-- == == (ants@kicker.com), May 23, 2000.

Sysman,

I'm glad to see you still around, I did enjoy discussing embeddeds with you in the past, and I honestly think I made you think... :o)

Now coe on and admitt it, I did get through to you on a few points now didn't I?

-- Cherri (sams@brigadoon.com), May 23, 2000.

Please do not assume I am taking sides here; this is just a philosophical question. Is shunning a form of self-censorship?

-- Normally (Oxsys@aol.com), May 23, 2000.

Are we going to let this be the 4th forum to close it's doors because of the rantings of this immature child? It sure looks that way.

Interesting that you would get that impression. I see no indication that this forum is closing its doors. Part of being Uncensored is tolerating what you would call "rantings of this immature child." Perhaps you are still living in "Timebomb" mode wherein everything you disagree with is automagically deleted so as to save the forum from destruction.

Look at the top level. LL this. LL that. The longest thread on recent answers, asking if we "respect" LL.

Yes, and here you are starting another thread about her. And the thread you refer to was started by a troll, and somehow this is her fault? Are you aware that many of the comments on that thread are an actual discussion about parental issues, much to the dismay of the trolls who started the thread? And let's see one of the most recent comments on that very thread:

You are proud of that, aren't you Laura.

You really are a shithead.

And I don't think I've ever said that to a "lady" before.

Oh, and FUCK-OFF Laura.

<:(=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), May 22, 2000.

Gosh, Sysman, you're really helping us move on to other subjects now aren't you!!

This isn't about me fighting with LL. It's about what is happening to this forum.

Please. "What's happening to this forum" is that there are a bunch of people like you who are obsessed with her to the point that you will start posts about her to tell us all to stop talking about her!! LOL

Perhaps you should practice what you preach. Maybe then people might believe you.

-- (hmm@hmm.hmm), May 23, 2000.

So, hmm goes on and starts talking about Sysman.

Kettle?

-- hmm is another idiot (secondary@LL.persona?), May 23, 2000.

Hey there, "LL is nutz," how's it going? Going to give us another LL-like rundown of your day?

-- (hmm@hmm.hmm), May 23, 2000.

Is shunning a form of self censorship?

Self-censorship would have be done by a person to them self. Shunning is becoming a socially acceptable form of internet intercourse wherein a person who disrupts a forum is ignored as appeased to being replied to. It has been found that a reply tends to add "fuel to the fire" and encourages the disrupter to continue the behavior others find irritating.

The unacceptable behavior fulfills any number of needs in the person doing it, usually compensating for something they are lacking within themself.

Ignoring a person you choose not to interact with is a normal social behavior, in "real life" you can walk away, on-line it is more difficult for you cannot avoid reading some of what they write, at least long enough to recognize who has written, in the hunt for posts that may hold an interest to you.

Shunning, or not reacting to them, does not fulfill their need and if that need is strong enough, they will become bored and go elsewhere to fulfill it.

Or to put it more clearly, when they do not get the reactions they desire, they will go somewhere else to find it.

Whether or not the subject of the conversations is about them self, the purpose of the interaction is. It always comes down to them, they are the center of the conversation, argument, fight, whatever it is because they, as a baby does, perceives them self as the center of the universe.

At the age of two years most children are beginning to learn that this is not true and have a difficult time learning to accept the fact.

Unless they are allowed to continue to believe it is true, most people out grow the misconception and find fulfillment in healthier emotions such as pride in themselves, feelings of accomplishment, even empathy.

Unfortunatly some people do not experience healthy emotional growth and look outside of themselves and exhibit behaviors which will draw the supply of attention they need to fulfill their needs.

It is an ego problem.

Some peoples ego's demand constant reassurance that they exist, where as a healthy ego needs no constant outward reassurance.

-- Cherri (sams@brigadoon.com), May 23, 2000.

Sysman,

The force is strong within you.

-- Patsy Cline (crazy@crazy.crazy), May 23, 2000.

Does hmmm=cpr?

-- (Hi Bruce@xxx.xxx), May 23, 2000.

hmmm you're a major a**hole sometimes

-- x (x@x.x), May 23, 2000.

And to think, not too long ago, I was merely a minor one. I must be moving up in the world! LOL.

-- (hmm@hmm.hmm), May 23, 2000.

Hey Sissyman if this forum can accommodate 5-8 posts a day from Reverend Driscol then the LL circus is just another thing. Come to think of it, neither Laura nor Al-d was as delusional as you were when it came to Y2K. If all of this becomes too much for you to handle you can always find refuge over at Eds shelter for recovering doomers.

Tick-Tock Baby!

-- Ra (tion@l.1), May 23, 2000.

Well hmm, for your edification, I will explain a little of the purpose of my posts of yesterday in which I listed my daily deeds, all while on line. Let me know if you do not understand anything, won't you?

LL stated: Furthermore, a GOOD mother wouldn't spend as much time on the computer as you do. She would be reading to them, cooking for them, cleaning their clothes, teaching THEM how to cook, clean, and read.

A GOOD mother would be: out playing catch with her children, teaching them to drive, teaching them good citizenship, or she would take them to a museum, to a ballet, to a symphony, or teach them how to use the computer.

She would NOT sitting at the computer for HOURS a day in a fucking chatroom!

That was originally directed to consumer. A public post that any could/can/did respond to.

LL stated to Peg: Women with children shouldn't spend more than an hour a day on the internet unless their livlihood depends on it. Period. Again, a public post that any could/can/did respond to.

I responded by telling of my activites while online in an effort to show that my home life, and my family were not suffering because of the amount of time spent surfing the web or in chatrooms[forums].

In fact, I found a delicious sounding recipe thru a 'real' chatroom that we will try tonight. That is, not a forum, but a chatroom. A poster directed me to someone's home page. Could have been their own I suppose, but that doesn't matter.

So, now that I have explained and shown that one can be online all day and still get things done, perhaps LL can rephrase her statement. [I was online for ten hours, btw.]

Perhaps LL could state it this way:

"a BAD mother shouldn't spend as much time on the computer as you do."

or

"'Bad Primary Care Givers' with children shouldn't spend more than an hour a day on the internet unless their livlihood depends on it."

Of course, I'm sure this is all over your head hmm, right? And LL won't change it either, but one can hope...

And this gem from LL! Hilarious!

I haven't done anything even remotely sexual since I was married!

ROTFLMAO

Kinda explains the divorce, I guess..... and maybe the break up with Mr. Polly?

Okay, back to the 'chatroom.'

-- LL is nutz! nutz! nutz! nutz! (nutz@nutz.nutz.nutz), May 23, 2000.

Well hmm, for your edification, I will explain a little of the purpose of my posts of yesterday in which I listed my daily deeds, all while on line. Let me know if you do not understand anything, won't you?

Thanks for the explanation. Indeed, you do appear to have a very full life. The only question, therefore, is why would someone with such a full life as yourself feel the need to obsess about another forum poster to the point where you start behaving exactly as she does?

-- (hmm@hmm.hmm), May 23, 2000.

I said I would explain a little of the purpose of my posts....

-- LL is nutz! nutz! nutz! nutz! (nutz@nutz.nutz.nutz), May 23, 2000.

LL is nutz!

YOU appear to be in need of therapy yourself for your extreme obsession with all things Laura. Pick one and go to it..*Soothing Voice..*Electric Shock..*Forehead Incision. Surely you have better uses for your free time, which seems to be limitless.

-- Ra (tion@l.1), May 23, 2000.

Say RA, can I get *Forehead Incision* with hot & sour soup? Or we talking a la carte?

-- Bingo1 (howe9@shentel.net), May 23, 2000.

Jealous, Ra?

-- LL is nutz! nutz! nutz! nutz! (nutz@nutz.nutz.nutz), May 23, 2000.

Rational 1, you're trying to be rational with the irrational. You CAN'T do that! I have to leave for the day, but I promise I'll be back tonight to watch those who obcess over me :o)

-- (Ladylogic@...), May 23, 2000.

Go ahead and obsess over my mispelling of obcess, Nutz. LOL! Next, I might let you smell my feet! (Can't get enough of me, can you?)

-- (Ladylogic@...), May 23, 2000.

Cherri:

Thank you for your comments regarding shunning and censorship. Apologies -- I did not mean to ask if shunning were a form of self- censorship. Obviously, that was a pre-caffeine question. I am really interested in how the flow of intercourse is stopped by both shunning and censorship, and the difference in dynamics between the two.

-- Normally (Oxsys@aol.com), May 23, 2000.

maybe LL has just come off the HRT

-- richard (richard.dale@onion.com), May 23, 2000.

(hmm@hmm.hmm),

I'm a little busy now, but I do want to take a minute for you.

I think you need to take reading lessons. Yes, I did say that I was fighting with LL. Who isn't these days?

I really hate it when someone quotes me, but doesn't bother to mention what I was replying to. So please allow me:

-----

Hey Nutz. Since you're such a fan of Diane's, have you checked out her new password protected forum?

Ha, hahahahahahahah ... ... ...

-- (Ladylogic@...), May 22, 2000

-----

So LL and her spam have succeded in limiting free public access to yet another forum. Do you support this, hmm? I sure don't. I'm not a big fan of Diane. In fact, I don't think I've ever posted a single message on her new forum. But I do know what was going on there. The same thing that went on at TB2000. The same thing that caused me to become one of LL's critics, when I used to be one of her supporters.

This is about what's right and what's wrong. Yes, I do believe in freedom. But I also don't think that people should abuse that freedom. Like yelling fire in a theatre. DO you support that, hmm?

Many of us "doomers" have admitted that we were wrong about Y2K. It really isn't that hard to admit that one was wrong. But I guess Laura is never wrong. About anything.

<:)=

PS to OTFR. I have a different IP address because I'm at my NYC office.

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), May 23, 2000.

I think you need to take reading lessons. Yes, I did say that I was fighting with LL. Who isn't these days?

My point was that you also said this:

Look at the top level. LL this. LL that. The longest thread on recent answers, asking if we "respect" LL.

Here you are commenting on the presence of LL threads at the "top level" as well as the longest thread in Recent Answers. And yet you started this thread about LL which was placed on the top level, and you also added yet more to the "longest thread" about LL in Recent Answers, making the thread even longer and pushing it back to the top of the list!

Then you have the audacity to comment about "what is happening to this forum!" LOL!! What's happening to this forum is YOU and people like you who obsess over Laura to the point that you start new threads just to talk about her! Apparently, I'm not the only one needing reading lessons here.

I really hate it when someone quotes me, but doesn't bother to mention what I was replying to. So please allow me:

I didn't mention what you were replying to because it was irrelevant. The fact that you replied AT ALL was the point I was trying to make.

So LL and her spam have succeded in limiting free public access to yet another forum. Do you support this, hmm?

Not in the least.

This is about what's right and what's wrong. Yes, I do believe in freedom. But I also don't think that people should abuse that freedom. Like yelling fire in a theatre. DO you support that, hmm?

Only if there's a fire.

Many of us "doomers" have admitted that we were wrong about Y2K. It really isn't that hard to admit that one was wrong. But I guess Laura is never wrong. About anything.

What the hell are you talking about? Who said anything about Laura never being wrong? What does this have to do with shouting fire in a crowded theatre or spamming somebody's forum?

Try to stay on the topic you started. You said It's about what is happening to this forum. That's this forum, right? Not Diane's forum, not some crowded theatre. The only thing happening in this forum is Laura fighting with some people who became offended with what she said about mothers and some trolls who only like to see her get riled up.

Nobody's saying you can't join in the fight if you want. But if you're going to insist on throwing in your 2 cents about her, don't try to pretend that you're not contributing to this place becoming "Lady Logic forum #4."

-- (hmm@hmm.hmm), May 23, 2000.

I agree with Lars, why do you people keep starting nasty threads about LL? Do you get some kind of kick out of jabbing her and making her mad?

-- gilda (jess@listbot.com), May 23, 2000.

And yet hmm gets off on watching and picking on people that watch and pick on LL.

Which witch is which?

lol

Face it, there are quite a few here and there that dislike LL for all she is, was, and will be, and what she does, did, and will do.

Whatcha gonna do about it? Follow her lead and call each anonymous poster by the same name? Go ahead. Maybe choose a name from her own list of detractors since it makes no difference.

If she left, the threads would most likely stop. If she acted like a normal person and avoided those that make her mad, there wouldn't be so many around that would pick on her.

It's like having a scab. At some point you experience the desire to pick at it. Some people are better at not picking at it than others.

So, just let us pick at the scab and you can look the other way. Okay?

-- Ll is a scab on the buttocks of the universe! (gott@pick.atit), May 23, 2000.

lol scab. rotflmao...

I guess if it itches, I'll pick at it. Or if it rubs me the wrong way.

-- (justme@here.now), May 23, 2000.

gotta,

No, we can't look the other way while you pick at someone. Will Rogers pointed out that so many people argue about the credentials of a certain messenger that they forget to listen to the message:

Don't hurt each other. If people hurt you, forgive them. They may not know what they're doing. If you absolutely cannot get along, shake the dust off of your shoes and walk away.

And more: No fence-sitting allowed. Be hot or cold, fer it or agin it, but you have to choose. To me, that means don't look away.

Please stop picking on this woman. If you think she's mentally ill, then picking on her is as cruel as picking on someone physically handicapped. If you think she's mentally sound but mean, being mean back to her isn't going to help her change. I can't believe it makes you a better person either.

-- helen (tired@last.please), May 23, 2000.

Helen said: No, we can't look the other way while you pick at someone. Will Rogers pointed out that so many people argue about the credentials of a certain messenger that they forget to listen to the message:

Well, Helen, I didn't really expect anyone to look the other way. After all, we are by nature curious. Just consider the many rubber-neckers at auto accidents....

As to the messenger/message, well, I haven't really heard anything from LL that I would consider worth listening to. But I have heard a lot that isn't worth listening too.

Say hi to Will Rogers for me, will ya?

Don't hurt each other. If people hurt you, forgive them. They may not know what they're doing. If you absolutely cannot get along, shake the dust off of your shoes and walk away.

This tactic was used on LL. Guess what? It's still here. I and others have tried to shake the dirt off our shoes, but it's still here.

And more: No fence-sitting allowed. Be hot or cold, fer it or agin it, but you have to choose. To me, that means don't look away.

Okay, watch as I and others pick at it if you like. Stranger things have I seen, than a woman watching another pick at a scab...

Please stop picking on this woman. If you think she's mentally ill, then picking on her is as cruel as picking on someone physically handicapped. If you think she's mentally sound but mean, being mean back to her isn't going to help her change. I can't believe it makes you a better person either. -- helen (tired@last.please), May 23, 2000.

I am not doing this to become a better person. I am doing this because she is a mean, no-good, lying, backbiting, conceited, no-nothing, addle-brained, un-marriable, heartless, unforgiving, condescending, stupid bitch.

Oh yeah, and for fun! LOL

Perhaps if you supplied proof that LL is mentally handicapped, beyond the obvious of course, I might consider not picking at it.

-- LL is nutz! nutz! nutz! nutz! nutz! nutz! (nutz@nutz.nutz.nutz), May 23, 2000.

And yet hmm gets off on watching and picking on people that watch and pick on LL.

I wouldn't say I "get off" on it, but it certainly offers some amusement. I've posted other things here besides comments about LadyLogic and her trolls. What else have you posted here that isn't an attack on LadyLogic or a "LadyLogic"-like rundown of the events in your day?

-- (hmm@hmm.hmm), May 23, 2000.

nutz

I can't supply you with "proof" of her mental state any more than she can supply me with "proof" of yours. I think what she's done is wrong, but that's no excuse for YOU to do wrong. Someone has to be the first to stop with the hatefulness.

-- helen (nowhere@in.particular), May 23, 2000.

Helen,

I hear what you are saying. Honestly I do, however if it were never started in the first place, then we wouldn't be in this mess. How can you possibly lay the blame on others, when it has been the disruptions of one that has caused this mess?

I don't believe that anyone here, with the exception of LL want this forum to be closed. She has done it to others, and now she has her sights set on this board. We all gave her a fair shake in the beginning. We are just so tired of the show. Most here are just voicing their thoughts to her actions. Each one has a right to voice that thought.

Frankly, I am sick of the all ladylogic all the time. Personally, I could care less if she did Mr. Polly, Diane, or Ed. Heck, I don't care if she did them all at the same time. They say that what comes around goes around. Think of this as her time of "goes around". If she were to behave in adult manner, she would be treated in an adult manner.

What I want to know, is who the hell she thinks she is to tell anyone that they aren't a good mother. All she shes of them is from a monitor that she looks into. Isn't there some saying about judge not lest ye be judged? She had done plenty of judging, so she now is being judged.

-- (noway@not.now), May 23, 2000.

For hmm

Don't say I never gave you anything....

Helen, you want one? LL needs a few..... LOL

-- LL is nutz! nutz! nutz! nutz! (nutz@nutz.nutz.nutz), May 23, 2000.

noway,

Why hide behind a new handle if you are sincere in your belief that your behavior is more in the right than helen's recommendations?

-- flora (***@__._), May 23, 2000.

I see zero evidence of LL wanting to shut down this forum. That's absurd, as she's obviously enjoying herself here.

She dealt graciously with trolls when this forum first began...(you will recall the love bomb?) but continues to be under attack daily, and why? Lies, rumors, accusations and fake LL's abound, and she is forced to defend herself. The "clean start" never happened as far as many people were concerned. Don't post "LL is nutz, crazy, etc" and then get upset when she says "Hey, screw you too"...

-- kritter (kritter@adelphia.net), May 23, 2000.

I see zero evidence of LL wanting to shut down this forum. That's absurd, as she's obviously enjoying herself here. True, but at the expense of others.

She dealt graciously with trolls when this forum first began...(you will recall the love bomb?) No, I don't recall that. but continues to be under attack daily, and why? Lies, rumors, accusations and fake LL's abound, and she is forced to defend herself. The "clean start" never happened as far as many people were concerned. Don't post "LL is nutz, crazy, etc" and then get upset when she says "Hey, screw you too"... -- kritter (kritter@adelphia.net), May 23, 2000.

Forced to defend herself? Forced to defend herself? Forced to defend herself? LOL

A simple "I didn't do that, honest!" would have been sufficient.

But she admitted to spamming Diane's forum, apparently to point of closing it, although no link has been provided so I haven't seen it myself.

She spammed old TB2000. I saw that. She spammed debunky's. I saw that, too. And she spammed Biffy's. I saw that as well.

She spammed here, too.

Anyone else been doing any spamming that I am not aware of? I don't think so. Maybe that Andy guy? But only the one forum, and not nearly as often as LL.

The difference between Andy [was it Andy?] and LL is that he had a valid point. LL only has a point on each wart on her body.

Not that I condone spamming by anyone. I only started two threads about LL, and both of them have the word nutz in the title. That to me is not spamming. They were on different days as well, May 18 and May 17.

I have kept my comments about her limited to those threads that refer to her. For the most part, anyway...

I am not upset when she says 'screw you.' I'm not upset when she says to smell her feet.

I am having a great time getting inside her head and swinging turdballs around and breaking things. You'd be surprised how hard that is, by the way. It's so empty in there....

[btw, LL uses the anonimizer.com as well as anyone else.]

-- LL is nutz! nutz! nutz! nutz! (nutz@nutz.nutz.nutz), May 23, 2000.

That's absurd, as she's obviously enjoying herself here.

True, but at the expense of others.

So? You're enjoying yourself at the expense of LL. You're becoming more like her all the time. LOL

She dealt graciously with trolls when this forum first began...(you will recall the love bomb?) but continues to be under attack daily, and why? Lies, rumors, accusations and fake LL's abound, and she is forced to defend herself. The "clean start" never happened as far as many people were concerned. Don't post "LL is nutz, crazy, etc" and then get upset when she says "Hey, screw you too"... -- kritter (kritter@adelphia.net), May 23, 2000.

Forced to defend herself? Forced to defend herself? Forced to defend herself? LOL

A simple "I didn't do that, honest!" would have been sufficient.

Great, there were several of them on the thread that started the most recent mess here. But of course, you didn't believe her. Guess it's not quite sufficient after all.

She spammed here, too.

Please list the times she spammed here.

Anyone else been doing any spamming that I am not aware of? I don't think so. Maybe that Andy guy? But only the one forum, and not nearly as often as LL.

I think you mean Manny.

The difference between Andy [was it Andy?] and LL is that he had a valid point. LL only has a point on each wart on her body.

Really? Interesting that you remember that he had a "valid point" yet you can't even remember his name. So, what was his "valid point" for spamming?

Not that I condone spamming by anyone. I only started two threads about LL, and both of them have the word nutz in the title. That to me is not spamming. They were on different days as well, May 18 and May 17.

Well, congratulations on your restraint. And you only used the phrase "LL is nutz" about 45 times total in those two threads.

I have kept my comments about her limited to those threads that refer to her. For the most part, anyway...

But of course you had no problem starting some threads that refer to her if there weren't already some for you to comment on. LOL

I am having a great time getting inside her head and swinging turdballs around and breaking things. You'd be surprised how hard that is, by the way. It's so empty in there....

Glad to know you're having such a great time. The real funny part is that some people are starting to feel bad for all the abuse she's taking from you. Looks like you'll end up making her into a martyr. Oh well. Enjoy!!

-- (hmm@hmm.hmm), May 23, 2000.

I did NOT spam DeBunker's. I posted 12 seperate love quotes to Mr Polly and Doc never said he had a problem with it. I NEVER spammed Biffy. YOU lie. YOU hide behind a fake name, old shit, not me. YOU are the one who has twisted my words because YOU are half retarded. YOU are the one who has perpetuated this fight, not me.

However, I got through periods where I'm bored with you and this is one of them. Don't expect me to address you again because I don't give a damn about what you say. All you have is words, and your words have NEVER had any effect on me.

Ta Ta, you dried up catfish with breasts!

-- (Ladylogic@...), May 23, 2000.

And yet you continue..... LOL

-- your full name (your@email.addy), May 23, 2000.

By the way, thanks Helen and Kritter. I'm always so busy fighting with my trolls I almost never get a chance to talk to the people I'd like to talk to.

There was one thing Diane always got right: *Sigh* shift happens :o)

-- (Ladylogic@...), May 23, 2000.

Please stop tearing each other up. Please.

-- helen (home@bed.time), May 23, 2000.

Tell her to stop first! She's been blasting my ass for 5 and 1/2 months now, and what I've done to her is chicken feed. She has taken meat from my bones (need I remind you of Mr Polly?) so why should I stop?

-- (Ladylogic@.....), May 23, 2000.

Laura,

I don't like fighting with anyone, not even you (grin). We were "friends" in the past. I don't know if we can ever do that again, but I don't like having enemies, on the net or in real life. I'm trying to make up with some of my old "enemies" of the past, people like Stephen Poole, and Chicken Little. I think I'm having some success in that area.

I know it looks like I'm picking on you here, but that's not what this is about. I've stayed out of the "bashing" unitl recently. But when I see something that I think is wrong, I've got to speak up.

What I see wrong here, and what I think is causing all of the noise, comes down to 2 things. First, is your view on mothers and the internet. Now, I don't have any kids, and I'm certainly not a mother. I will say that I don't think it's any of your business. But if you feel the need to express yourself on this, fine. It's your opinion, and I don't have a problem with that. This is what freedom is all about.

But what I do have a problem with is what you did to Diane's forum. It's just not right Laura. You and Diane are ancient history. Why can't you just let it go? Like I said above, I'm not a big fan of Diane. But what you did to her forum, and to TB2000, just isn't right.

I'll take back what I said here about you trying to bring this forum down. I'll take back calling you a shithead, and telling you to fuck- off. I'll stay off your case in the future. All I want in return is for you to think about what you did. You don't have to admit that you were wrong. You don't have to apologize. Just think about it, and why.

So, can we start working out a truce here, or what?

<:)=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), May 23, 2000.

Laura, someone has to stop first. Being able to hurt and withholding the hurt is called mercy. I hope one of you is merciful first...and soon.

The thing with Mr. Polly was announced in public. I worried about you then, since I've seen many internet romances bog down when it was carried over into real life. I'm sorry it didn't work out. I don't know what Diane had to do with that, but I do think you're far better off to find out Mr. Polly's hangup early on. The break up was also announced in public. It's hard enough to deal with even when others give you support, and I didn't see much support for you here. I'm not sure this is even the right place for anyone to seek that type of support.

If I were in your shoes, I think I would be dealing with a great deal of grief. And it would piss me off to have someone make fun of my situation. I don't know what else to tell you. I wish you peace.

-- helen (re@lly.tired), May 23, 2000.

Tell her to stop first! She's been blasting my ass for 5 and 1/2 months now, and what I've done to her is chicken feed. She has taken meat from my bones (need I remind you of Mr Polly?) so why should I stop? -- (Ladylogic@.....), May 23, 2000.

SHE STARTED IT!!! ROTFLMAO LOL !!!!!!!

You idiot! You have no idea who I am! She this and She that! LOL

If you think I am Old Git.....you are wrong.

If you think I am Diane.......you are wrong.

If you think I am any of the people on your very long list.....you are wrong.

I am not on your list. You have no idea who I am. You have never known me. We have never 'spoken' to one another. I am anonymous to you.

I am a person from the old forum that you so maliciously trashed time and again to the point that I was fed up with you. And yet I never said a word then about it. I just went elsewhere until you were done.

I watched you at Debunkers. I saw. I read.

I watched you at Biffy's. I saw. I read.

I have watched you here. I see. I read.

Bok's chat? I saw. I read.

I, however, do not post threats of keeping files on people. I do not post threats of spamming other people's forums. I do not gloat about spamming other people's forums. I do not spam other people's forums. I do not initiate DOS attacks on other people's forums, and I do not flood people with unsolicited email so that they have to change their address. I do not put other people's addresses on mailing lists without their approval.

Mr. Polly apparently had a problem with you. If not, nothing anyone said or did would have mattered.

You have been, and continue to be, one of the most malicious individuals it has been my misfortune to encounter.

I will not stop. As long as you are here, you will hear from me. If I ever encounter you anywhere else on the 'net, you will hear from me. As will any who read my words.

So, you wanna play nice, or what?

-- anonymous (not@this.addy), May 24, 2000.

Ok, you guys, you've made me think tonight. I'll try to make a truce with them. Being angry with them hasn't served me any purpose, and it doesn't seem to get anywhere. We just keep arguing the same old argument, and I'm bored to tears with it. Maybe I have been sticking my nose in where it doesn't belong, but dog gone it, I really do worry about those children. I suppose ultimately I've been wrong(?) because mothers know what's best for their children, and I'm pretty sure no one here would intentionally hurt their kids.

As far as Diane goes, Sysman, I only spammed her forum twice and only 14 and 15 times respectively. That's a hell of a lot different than the hundreds of times I spammed TB. I also cussed in those posts, but like Yourdon, et. al. she's never said she's sorry and I couldn't let her just walk away. She opened a PUBLIC forum, and was out of her mind if she thought some of us wouldn't retaliate. I don't expect you to understand of course; you weren't banned, so trying to discuss this seems like a waste of time. The day that a BANNED person wants to discuss this with me, I'll be happy to listen.

-- (Ladylogic@...), May 24, 2000.

As far as Diane goes, Sysman, I only spammed her forum twice and only 14 and 15 times respectively. That's a hell of a lot different than the hundreds of times I spammed TB. I also cussed in those posts, but like Yourdon, et. al. she's never said she's sorry and I couldn't let her just walk away. She opened a PUBLIC forum, and was out of her mind if she thought some of us wouldn't retaliate. I don't expect you to understand of course; you weren't banned, so trying to discuss this seems like a waste of time. The day that a BANNED person wants to discuss this with me, I'll be happy to listen.

-- (Ladylogic@...), May 24, 2000.

Although I was never banned, so therefore I honestly cant relate to that. But it appears that you are trying to justify it. LL, we ALL make wrong choices, it isnt hard to admit that.

Why shouldnt she open a free forum and expect respect? I've said it over and over, I didnt like the banning at the new ez board, so although I got a password, I never utilized it. I didnt retaliate either.

It now appears that her forum is CLOSED. This is sad. We should each be able to start/manage a forum and be given a chance to have some decent conversation.

My problem with you is that you have accused me of being a drunk, repeatedly. That is outright SLANDER. Even you 'tip' a few. Why was I 'singled' out and labeled a drunk who doesnt care for her child?

I think of heartless things, and to get to my heart, is w/my children.

I said I wouldnt address you w/out using my real handle, and I havent, but I would like to see a response, not a justifcation.

regards, consumer

-- consumer (shh@aol.com), May 24, 2000.

Looks like we posted at the same time.

I am a person from the old forum that you so maliciously trashed time and again to the point that I was fed up with you.

Bullshit.

I, however, do not post threats of keeping files on people..

Neither have I. I have NEVER said I have files on people. (I don't) I have threatened three people,(Ron Schwartz, Netghost, and Cavscout) and apparently they have forgiven me. So why are YOU so upset??

I do not post threats of spamming other people's forums..

I spammed TB and Bok's. Furthermore, if you read my post above, I only MILDLY spammed Diane's (and it felt good).

I do not gloat about spamming other people's forums. I do not spam other people's forums..

I should care,... why?

I do not initiate DOS attacks on other people's forums,.

I have never DoSed. YOU need to learn the difference between DoS and spam.

and I do not flood people with unsolicited email so that they have to change their address..

I NEVER have. You just don't know it.

I do not put other people's addresses on mailing lists without their approval..

I NEVER have. You just don't know it.

Oh yeah! I just remembered! You're Mrs Bok! Guess what? I already forgave you a minute ago, and I apologized to you and your husband last year. You do hold a grudge, don't you?

-- (Ladylogic@...), May 24, 2000.

....out of her mind if she thought some of us wouldn't retaliate...

US? Some of us?

What are you, the Queen of Bitches?

[Slaps forehead] Look who I'm asking! More coffee needed.

Who else spammed her forum? Anyone? Anyone?

-- anonymous (not@this.addy), May 24, 2000.

consumer, it would be slander if I used your REAL name. Accusing "consumer" of something doesn't amount to squat.

Look, I'm just worried about your kids. I don't know why you post personal information like your drinking habits on an internet forum and NOT expect to get flamed. *I* certainly expect to get flamed for the things I do, and don't whine when it happens.

I'm sorry if I hurt you, and like I said earlier, I'm sure you do the best for your kids, but dog gone it! I CAN'T HELP BUT WORRY ABOUT THEM. However, there's nothing I can do about it, and you seem to be a nice enough lady when you're not drinking or accusing me of bullshit otherwise, so I'd like to say I'm sorry.

I'm sorry, consumer. I'm sure your kids are fine.

-- (Ladylogic@....), May 24, 2000.

"....out of her mind if she thought some of us wouldn't retaliate..."

You DO need another cup of coffee. I am the only one that SPAMMED. Others retaliated in their own ways. I DID NOT do the other things to her.

-- (Ladylogic@....), May 24, 2000.

No one else has exhibited the feelings towards her that you have, so your pointing to others doesn't sound likely.

And there you go, apologizing to consumer for the slander but not for the unsolicited mail?

Curious, that. Yes, curious... Calling her a liar while apologizing for the drunk comments?

[and I was there at old TB, and the rest, for ALL of it. No bullshit!]

-- anonymous (not@this.addy), May 24, 2000.

Anonymous,

I was there I saw it too,all of it,from early 98 on,and yes it pissed me off too.But damn!!!,if we don't ever get on and get on with it and over it THEN Y2K was a disaster,FOR YOU.I vehemently disagree(d) with the SLEZ board,but did I or do I keep trying to drill my point home? no because it is a waste of time and energy.

If you continue as stated,then you are no better than those you despise.Your disruption is absolutely no different,just another version of creative shit stirrin'.Are you above a new beginning? How big a person are you? Who made you the I-net vigulante?

As a matter of fact,yea I have came across rather heavy to some of the other posters.on the one side I probably owe an apology to Fint,Ken and anon's for their take on the OTFR censorship issue And to Sysman and Chuck for their lack of reaction to the other boards actions.

I WENT OVERBOARD,I APOLOGIZE.

See it ain't that bad dude.

-- capnfun (capnfun1@excite.com), May 24, 2000.

Al-d

What would Jesus do?

-- (nemesis@awol.com), May 24, 2000.

"I WENT OVERBOARD,"

How does one go "overboard" when the rights of real, live people are violated?

-- (Just @sking.for the sake of .humankind), May 24, 2000.

Let me rephrase;I WENT OVERBOARD WITH VENGANCE AND VERBOSITY.

In principle I was very right but in reality my method could have more refined and thusly effective.

-- capnfun (capnfun1@excite.com), May 24, 2000.

Neither have I. I have NEVER said I have files on people. (I don't) I have threatened three people,(Ron Schwartz, Netghost, and Cavscout) and apparently they have forgiven me. So why are YOU so upset??

Why are you Laura?... time to let it all go, get over it and move on...

-- Netghost (ng@no.yr), May 24, 2000.

Netghost, YOU of all people should know I don't care about the past! (Why did you say that???)

-- (Ladylogic@...), May 24, 2000.

(BTW, I only threatened to break your kidneys with a play on words. I also threatened to turn Ron in to Amazon.com for his spamming, and Cavscout for....well, I don't want to rehash that because that effects his quality of life.)

-- (Ladylogic@...), May 24, 2000.

Time to move on Laura... it's forgive and forget time... just like we did...

-- Netghost (ng@no.yr), May 24, 2000.

Ok, because in one sense....I love you, dude.

I'm outta here.

-- (Ladylogic@...), May 24, 2000.

I'm glad to see that we are making at least some progress here. But it is 3:30 AM. Power just came back on after a nasty thunderstorm here in NJ. After it was out for about an hour, we looked at the sump, and cranked up the trusty old Y2K generator. Guess what? 2 minutes later, the power was back! LOL!!!

Bed time. See you kids later. <:)=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), May 24, 2000.

Peaceful dreams, Sysman.

-- (Ladylogic@ outta here on .vacation), May 24, 2000.

How cool is this timing?

I'm about to leave to a place to where only one person knows me. A place that no one knows what y2k means! I can leave knowing that everyone in the US is Ok, and doing fine, no matter what I do or say, or have ever said. (To some extent.)

My time here has been extemely productive. I have learned much more than I ever thought was possible by the method of written communication. Please know that whereever I am in the world, I'll be thinking of you people, and the experiences we've been though together (good and bad) and will forever have you in my heart. Believe me or not, I will always hold you dearly. (Even my trolls (!), for you have taught me almost as much as those who love me....)

As much as I've loved (and hated :o) our time together, I really have to get on with my life because what is life for?.... living of course. I have Precious young souls who depend on me (nieces and nephews) and I can't let them down. With all of my heart I wish I could stay here and talk about what happened to us, but that would take away from the future of those who need me.

Adios, mi amigas and mi amigos! (Por favor! Forgive a white girl for butchering a beautiful language.) Bye, bye enemies and online friends of mine. I hope you fare well.

I have to get out of this fucking heat before it kills me!

-- (Lady @ gone on.vacation), May 24, 2000.

Yet another LL swan song. If she makes it over a week without posting it would be a divine miracle...and we'd have to start taking al-d seriously.

-- (she'll@be. back), May 24, 2000.

Ok, capn, you yourself have often referenced tipping a few, how come YOU werent singled out?

Ahhh how well I remember the St Paddy's thread.? Didnt alot of us toast each other?

But I'm the drunk.? I gotta agree, she'll be back beyond a doubt.

And another thing, you also let loose on my 19yr old because he made a mistake having a child out of wedlock...who made YOU the morality police.?

You still dont get it? as someone else posted, you said us, I will tell you STRAIT up, I never spammed d's forum. EVER.

-- consumer (shh@aol.com), May 24, 2000.

"How cool is this timing?"

Any time you leave it's cool.

The shitty part is when you come back.....

I figure that'll be before I get home from work tonight.

-- (loves@to.seehergo), May 24, 2000.

LL leave this forum? That'll be the day! She'll be there lurking and posting under another name or three. We are her social life.

-- Wonderin (wonderin@about.lots.of.things), May 24, 2000.

Just remember, she lies....

-- LL is nutz! nutz! nutz! nutz! (nutz@nutz.nutz.nutz), May 24, 2000.

Sumer,

I don't know why I wasn't singled out too,I make no apologies,I LIKE TO PARTY!!! and rassle: )

-- capnfun (capnfun1@excite.com), May 24, 2000.

LOL. The trolls are missing her already.

-- (hmm@hmm.hmm), May 24, 2000.

Well hmm, if you miss her, you can write to her. She posted her new addy around here somewhere....lemme see, something like LadyLogic2000@cs.com?

-- LL is nutz! nutz! nutz! nutz! (nutz@nutz.nutz.nutz), May 24, 2000.

Capn, I hear that...I like to party, but not in Excess, once in a great while, I PARTY. There is a difference. Although, now, wrestlin, hmm, different subject. :-}

PS glad to c ya back, hope all is well. (hope you dont mind I singled you out...lol)

sumer

-- consumer (shh@aol.com), May 24, 2000.

Consumer,

I frankly wondered why I wasn't singled out in the 1st place,as my reputation proceeds itself.The only reasons I can figure is that I don't have kids and am male.

No,I didn't mind at all,take a WHOLE LOT more than that to rankle the capn,besides,ya know I'm just a laid back kinda guy.Oh,look at the clock,it's beer-thirty!!! : )

-- capnfun (capnfun1@excite.com), May 24, 2000.

Beer thirty?

Lightweight. Manly men such as myself wait no longer than beer fifteen.

Cappy, you and I will hook up some day and do some serious bar tab damage. Houseboat in the Keys? Yeah, my kinda guy, no doubt.

Consumer, doan let her get ya down, there are a lot of us regular folks who enjoy libations without letting it interfere with living a happy productive life. And then there are those who are obsessed with worry about what others do, best to ignore that kind, as you will never please them.

-- Uncle Deedah (unkeed@yahoo.com), May 24, 2000.

Unkie, AMEN. hic

-- helen (p@rty.time), May 24, 2000.

Hot Damn Unk!!! LMFAO!!!

Let's have it, "some serious bar tab damage" somehow that has an alluring ring to it,how elegant.Can we take the laptop with us???; ) You say your on the beach,most excellent! I'll drive down from Tune Town,find a killer tiki bar and belly up.Just my kinda element.

Sumer,

Unk's right,you can please some of the people some of the time,you can please yourself most of the time,but you can't please either ALL the time.

Want us to save you a seat at the bar?Learn from professionals,from the comfort of your own barstool,laptop provided for course work and note taking; )

-- capnfun (capnfun1@excite.com), May 24, 2000.

Sysman,

Looks as if your post was self prophesying(sp?) kind of ironic,kind of funny.

-- capnfun (capnfun1@excite.com), May 24, 2000.

Agreed Sysman, Netghost, will ignore threads started by those obsessed with LL, revenge on LL, etc.

-- FactFinder (FactFinder@bzn.com), May 24, 2000.

Thank you! Thank you! Huzzah! Yay!

-- helen (imsoh@ppy.now), May 24, 2000.

Nowwww lemmmeee seeeee, Capn Fun, Unc and the DRUNK? All at one time, w/laptops, no guyz see you have to entice a lil further than that, see I MUST have a hot-tub or I'm not in. :-{

BTW, capn my dear, YOU GOT MAIL.....

---consumer whoo has the day off tomorrow and kicking back.

soooooo, lets DO IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :-) while listening to bob seger.

-- consumer (shh@aol.com), May 24, 2000.

BTW, I meant PARTY

opening mouth, inserting foot....lol.

-- consumer (shh@aol.com), May 24, 2000.

Agreed Sysman, Netghost, will ignore threads started by those obsessed with LL, revenge on LL, etc.

-- FactFinder (FactFinder@bzn.com), May 24, 2000.

One of the few times you were right FF... I will ignore most threads trashing Laura, she and I made our peace months ago, you might try the same...

-- Netghost (ng@no.yr), May 24, 2000.

Timing simply is!

You've Won L.L.!!!!

Yeah for you!!!

And the prize is??? What?

Masterful!!

Helen asks about doing the right thing ?????????????????????

Consumer questions herself.....

And you have melted off into the background.

There are people here who care about being honest to themselves, this is obvious.

What are your motives?

What do you get out of being here?

-- -- -- (ant@kicker.com), May 25, 2000.

She doesn't need motives, she is the center of thr universe.

Since she does not have anything to contribute to the threads that involve thought, she will post something that is insulting to someone so she gets flamed, which allows her to rant, and others who have been victoms of her rants will blast her even more, along comes someone she hasn't ferrited personal details out of yet to defend her and we have days of her being in the spotlight.

Her so called apologies to consumer were filled with derogitory comments about consumer.

Her little games are transparent if you understand them.

First she is all nicey and complimentary to someone, acting like she considers them the most wonderful person in the world, she mails compliments along with a request for a phone number. From there she talks to them in a way that causes them to let their guard down, after all we talk to real friends on the phone. Once her latest victom is comfortable she manipulates them into telling her personal information. After all a person who acts like they think we walk on water would keep personal information we share with them wouldn't they? In reality she is an insecure woman who resents other women getting attention, especially from the men who are around. Soon she has a reason to be "mad" at her victom and she blasts them publicly with the personal information she aquired.

This is to discredit the other woman, although sometimes she does it to men who do not follow the "game plan" by drooling all over her, or who have come to see through her. This allows another round of attention getting threads all about her where she can act all innocent and concerned and tell people to fuck off.

Hasn't anyone else noticed the same game she plays over and over again?

I think that those who have gone through it should explain it to her new potential victoms so they will recognise the warning signs.

I will just bet that a lot of people have recieved the same gushy, adoring e-mails full of compliments with arequest for a phone number.

I have been on line for over four years and when she mailed me out of the blue with these syrupy compliments and a phone number request- alarms whent off in my head. I have talked on the phone to people I have met on line, but not until I had known them long enough to be able to trust them.

I am willing to bet that she has used a variation of these methods most of her adult life.

I am also willing to bet that she was pretty and rich growing up which got her the kind of attention that made her the way she is. On line we cannot see her looks or see her financial status so she is religated to the status of everyone else. She is judged by her words and actions, and they alone do not bring her the attention she is used to.

The only way left to her to get the attention she is used to is to play games.

It is also very telling that the women she "hates" so much are the ones who tend to be the most intelligent, interesting, and together.

So if she cannot stand you, consider it a compliment, she knows she is inferior and is threatened by you. She has to tear you down and make you look bad so the guys won't like you better than her.

I do not believe I have seen anything of substance posted by her, any subject that did not entail her in some way. It's almost like she is not capable of normal interaction with others on normal adult nature.

I understand those who defend her, their hearts are in the right place, unfortunatly it is because of that that they are the most vulnerable to her manipulation. A warning to you, do not tell her anything she can use against you or anything you do not want known publicly. A LOT of the people she bashes are ones who defended her atone time.

-- Cherri (sams@brigadoon.com), May 25, 2000.

Actually, the only thing I'm noticing right now, Cherri, is that you're still talking about her even though she's gone. It's amazing to see that the ones who complain so much about her needing attention are the same ones who are giving her the attention she seeks. Even our little "ants@kicker" troll started a brand new thread just to talk about her again! LOL! Now, who's the one looking for attention? Perhaps you've also forgotten that this whole mess was started by this thread which was not written by LL, but by consumer. She had been relatively silent on the board for weeks before that thread was posted.

I would suggest that you, like Sysman, practice what you preach, and stop giving her all this attention if that is indeed what you feel she is looking for.

-- (hmm@hmm.hmm), May 25, 2000.

Cherri, as a fellow "hag" [g], you know I hear you and you know I went through similar. But surely you must also know how pointless it is to try to explain this to anyone; how ludicrous it all sounds because it IS, in fact, LUDICROUS that an adult would act this way. I had a rather long response written to some of the defenders here, not entirely unlike yours, detailing a sequence of events dating back to last year, but realized it was just a waste of time. In reading it over, *I* almost couldn't believe it.

I'm all for giving people second chances, but how many "second chances" does one have? How many more people are going to sit back (as you and I and others have done) and let their words be twisted and mangled into incomprehension for the sole purpose of one person appearing to be the Eternal Victim? How many more people are going to be "fucked off" and accused of having a drinking problem? (consumer, you weren't the only one.) Defending ourselves only seems to result in the old "when did you stop beating your wife?" trap.

Ignore the problem and in this case it DOESN'T go away. It comes back when you least expect it. Unfortunately, outside of ignoring this, I don't see any alternative. Truly sad.

-- Patricia (PatriciaS@lasvegas.com), May 25, 2000.

"hmm" must be gagging on talcum powder from having his lips attached to Laura's butt for so long.

-- (what's up@with.that?), May 25, 2000.

You can bet she's lurking. We're her surrogate, dysfunctional family.

-- Poster Boy (posters@"r".us), May 25, 2000.

But she's not posting. One would think that would make you happy. And yet, here you are, still trying to goad her.

Face it, you live for her posts, don't you? LOL

-- (hmm@hmm.hmm), May 25, 2000.

hmm,

Ladylogic is a highly manipulative person. It is interesting to watch her machinations and analyze what they reveal as she interacts with others. In this sense, I miss her. But I'd be sorry for anyone who got entangled with her in real life.

-- Analyst (analyst@president's.con), May 25, 2000.

Can you spell B-O-R-D-E-R-L-I-N-E ??

-- (lookitup@disorders.oops), May 25, 2000.

Cherri you know damn well I wanted to call you to discuss Dave Hall. I wanted to talk RT because I didn't want to waste my time TYPING back then. I was in a HURRY to collect information on embeddeds and I wanted to call him as well as the other people I contacted...ON THE PHONE.

I thought YOU were righteous way back then because you were already digging up information on him. I lost ALL respect for you right afterwards because I found out you have a child and spend WAY too much time in chatrooms! LOL! Shall I remind these people what you talk about too??? hmmm???

No, I won't do that. I don't want to embarrass you anymore. Besides, I got a plane to catch.

Pat,

I have NEVER e-mailed you OR asked for personal information. I've never liked you well enough to care!

-- (Ladylogic@...), May 25, 2000.

Actually, the only thing I'm noticing right now, Cherri, is that you're still talking about her even though she's gone.

It's amazing to see that the ones who complain so much about her needing attention are the same ones who are giving her the attention she seeks.

HHHHmmmmm,

Only one problem with your little ramble there, I do not post in responce to her. Above I gave an explaination to someone elses question and the last post was not to her as she has supposidly gone, it was an answer to a question written by someone else. It was also to those who are defending her, not posted to give her attention, but to attempt to draw it away from her.

It is not beyound the realm of possiblility that you really are her, if not then you would do good to read my words. I do not usually bother reading what she writes, as it is the same thing over and over. I prefer to read the amazing words of others, especially the other women as it is a pleasure to finally know there are other women like me out there, as I have run into so few in real life. I even run through what aL writes, unless he makes his contributions in too many posts. This forum has evolved into a place where ideas are discussed and new concepts are shared. I bring it to your attention that Lady Logic has contributed nothing to those discussions, except for an odd compliment here and there (perhaps in the attempt to bait fresh fish). I am not telling anyone what to think about her, I am showing a possible motive and agenda to her actions so people can be aware of certain signs and "prepare" themselves for the possible "worse case scenerio". :o)

Argueing with her and posting my conclusions about her actions are two different things.

Now back to reading the words of people with interesting ideas to share.

-- Cherri (sams@brigadoon.com), May 25, 2000.

Only one problem with your little ramble there, I do not post in responce to her.

This is irrelevant. It is not necessary to post in response to someone in order to get them to respond to you

Above I gave an explaination to someone elses question and the last post was not to her as she has supposidly gone, it was an answer to a question written by someone else. It was also to those who are defending her, not posted to give her attention, but to attempt to draw it away from her.

So you wrote a post all about LadyLogic in order to draw attention away from her? LOL

It is not beyound the realm of possiblility that you really are her,

Nor is it beyond the realm of possibility that you are really her. I was the very first visitor to this forum. One would suspect, therefore, that she would have made her presence known much earlier than she did. But then, perhaps you believe that this is all part of her master plan. It probably has to do with the chemtrails.

I bring it to your attention that Lady Logic has contributed nothing to those discussions, except for an odd compliment here and there (perhaps in the attempt to bait fresh fish).

Perhaps she hasn't contributed anything you consider valuable. Lots of people probably haven't. This, in and of itself, is not what appears to be bothering you about her, is it?

I am not telling anyone what to think about her, I am showing a possible motive and agenda to her actions so people can be aware of certain signs and "prepare" themselves for the possible "worse case scenerio". :o)

Argueing with her and posting my conclusions about her actions are two different things.

But they will achieve the same result, as you have now seen here. They bring her back to do all the things that you have said you don't like about her. That was my point.

-- (hmm@hmm.hmm), May 25, 2000.

hmm,

We all know that your point is on top of your head, so there is no need to continue the attempts to draw our attention away from it.

-- Hoping the jackscrew gives her a ride to remember! (LL@irborne.everyone.duck), May 25, 2000.

Cherri,

LOL! Score! 2 Points!

-- -- -- (littleant@kicker.com), May 25, 2000.

Perhaps she hasn't contributed anything you consider valuable. Lots of people probably haven't. This, in and of itself, is not what appears to be bothering you about her, is it?

Her lack of substance in writing on this forum and others is a clue to her personality.

And yes, writing about her can be method of denying her attention, if what I write achieves the purpose for which I intended it.

-- Cherri (sams@brigadoon.com), May 25, 2000.

Cherri and Pat:

Thank you for the post. Cherri, you summed it up for me.

I also read somewhere a poster put wonder how long before she is back?

ROFLMAO, answer simple she NEVER left.

Hmm, you seem to contradict yourself alot, times you see the true her, then you dont. I've learned to be fair. I give you the benefit of the doubt although I dont always understand you.

I certainly am glad I never got asked for my phone number, ol dumb me would of gave that out too. I'm learning not to trust again after 38 years, its refreshing to know I still dont know....know what I mean?

Antkicker you got it going on :-) I dont know why, but you are growing on me.

Pat or whoever, is correct though, she craves attention, give her none, she'll move onto the next one. Manipulative? You betcha, as presented in her apology w/the derogatory remarks. She IS good though because as you can see, she 'almost' sucked me in. Again.

Thanks Sysman, for trying, you are a good dude, and most all of us know it.

For us LADIES, the real ones, We got it going ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

---enjoying my day off.

-- consumer (shh@aol.com), May 25, 2000.

Hi Laura,

I haven't yet read this whole thread, nor am I very familiar with how this whole thing started, so I hope you'll forgive me if I've misconstrued your intent.

Please, please, please leave these mothers be with respect to the time they may or may not spend in chatrooms and/or forums!

Peoples' lives, their down time at work, their kids' needs and maturity, quality versus quantity time spent with them, etc. etc. are far, far too complex as a whole for someone to attempt the fantastic oversimplification of pigeonholing them as bad parents because they've chosen to spend more time at a given pursuit than you would.

-- eve (eve_rebekah@yahoo.com), May 25, 2000.

And yes, writing about her can be method of denying her attention, if what I write achieves the purpose for which I intended it.

Was your purpose to get her to return to the forum after saying that she was leaving? If so then you've definitely achieved your purpose.

Hmm, you seem to contradict yourself alot, times you see the true her, then you dont. I've learned to be fair. I give you the benefit of the doubt although I dont always understand you.

Perhaps the reason is because you see this as an either/or situation. Either I am for LL, or I am against her. The trolls see it the same way. When I point out her irrational behavior, they say that I'm "turning against her." However, when I point out that she did not fire the first volley in this latest skirmish, of course my lips are covered in "ass powder." LOL

I don't see this as a contradiction at all. Sometimes people are right, and sometimes they're wrong.

Antkicker you got it going on :-) I dont know why, but you are growing on me.

Pat or whoever, is correct though, she craves attention, give her none, she'll move onto the next one.

Which is exactly why you shouldn't let antkicker "grow" on you too much. He/she wants her here far more than any of us, as you can plainly see. Looks like you've got some contradictions going on yourself. LOL

-- (hmm@hmm.hmm), May 25, 2000.

Ok, hmm, I GIVE, you are right to a degree. Hey its me day off, cut me some slack.

I will once again TRY to be MORE openminded.

Yes I started the one post, but why do you keep bringing that up?

Looks like we both got some contradicting goin on, eh?

-- consumer (shh@aol.com), May 25, 2000.

Yes I started the one post, but why do you keep bringing that up?

Because it seems that some people have forgotten what it was that started this recent mess with LL.

-- (hmm@hmm.hmm), May 25, 2000.

hmm,

I don't care if L.L. is here or not. I did care enough when consumer was under attack to lend a hand in her support.

I was simply egging L.L. on so she would totaly put her foot in her mouth. There are others here much more capable of taking her apart if they choose to. As I've said before my intent wasn't to damage, just expose.

Consumer can let me "grow" on her if she wants to. You are only the self-appointed referee with your "demands of proof" trailing along in your little red wagon. You strike me as a Flint "wanabe".

I've been around awhile too.

Back to lurking.....

-- -- -- (littlebittieant@kicker.com), May 25, 2000.

Eve wrote:

"Peoples' lives, their down time at work, their kids' needs and maturity, quality versus quantity time spent with them, etc. etc. are far, far too complex as a whole for someone to attempt the fantastic oversimplification of pigeonholing them as bad parents because they've chosen to spend more time at a given pursuit than you would."

That's the best thing said on this whole thread. I wholeheartedly agree that how people choose to spend their time is nobody's business and trying to characterize them based on that one oversimplification is unfair.

-- Buddy (buddydc@go.com), May 25, 2000.

I don't care if L.L. is here or not.

Of course you do. You even posted a brand new thread to "egg her on" after she said she was leaving. Why egg her on if she isn't even here?

I was simply egging L.L. on so she would totaly put her foot in her mouth.

Did it help? Did anything you said actually affect what she wrote?

Consumer can let me "grow" on her if she wants to. You are only the self-appointed referee with your "demands of proof" trailing along in your little red wagon.

I know. Much better to just make unsubstantiated accusations, right?

You strike me as a Flint "wanabe".

I've been called worse. LOL

Back to lurking.....

For how long, I wonder.

-- (hmm@hmm.hmm), May 25, 2000.

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm = LL? Could it be?

-- nonya (whocares@me.see), May 25, 2000.

What I can't believe is that you folks are still posting to this thread and others like it. Don't you think she's had enough attention?

{major eye roll}

-- cin (cin@cin.cin), May 25, 2000.

my momma once told me not to roll my eyez because they could freeze that way. and why did you post here if you wanted it to stop. just so you could freeze your eyes.

-- ############################# (##@##.###), May 25, 2000.

She's a psycho Libra with Venus in Scorpio and Mercury in Virgo. That's all you need to know.

-- lisa (lisa@work.now), May 31, 2000.

Sounds like a dangerous combination!

-- Star Man (starman@kulimonians.are.all.around.us), May 31, 2000.

lisa bucher (@ home) sucks blood from cow butchers with big mountain oysters. ha!

-- (v@mpires @ us.cum), June 01, 2000.

Lisa,

how do you know this information?

-- Lurker2 (lurker2@lots.to.lurk.for), June 01, 2000.

Do you think that LL's trolls will show up in L.V. for the party? If they really are other people, not just her alter-identities, she might be hesitant to reveal herself (but I'll be she'll be there).

-- Cosmo (cosmo@whois.thereal.LL?), June 01, 2000.

I didn't know she was back. Help us.

-- Mimmi Miiniinii (dope@slap.per), August 11, 2000.

Wouldn't this predispose her to obcession with sex, drugs, and maybe superficiality and appearance over substance?

-- Wonderin (about@the.futility.of.it.all), August 11, 2000.

Interesting to see this thread float to the top...

Some here think that LL is the anon identity thief. I really don't think so.

I did manage to "make up" with LL before she split (for the umteenth time (grin...)). We've been back-and-forth many times. Now I'm not looking to start another "war" with her, but one thing that I think I can say for sure is this.

Her ego would never let her post as anyone except herself.

<:)=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), August 12, 2000.

in a word Bullshit sysman pure bullshit

her ego doesnt want to get caught pure and simple

-- (icanc@the.truth), August 12, 2000.

Pretty sneaky, Patsy.

-- a lot of people say (wh@ts.that), August 12, 2000.

Bruce, yeah...but, would her ego make her keep bringing this stupid thread about her...To The Top??

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHA HA

-- (smooches@to you.all), August 12, 2000.