The peak performance of your dishonesty act is various means of denial such as this. You can repeatedly deny as much as you put in the work, but I don't know why you would make yourself look so bad repeatedly.

You lie. I tell the the truth about your lies. You can never win an honest argument by your method against someone who has the more accurate and complete information, you denying little liar. Haha.

If you multiplied your last couple of posts a few dozen times across multiple threads is what everyone here but you mean when we say you were spamming the forum between your stints as mod.

You mean you have no honest disagreement with me, but only dishonest disagreement. You're not the only mod with this problem, but you are the worst at hiding it.

You don't have any goods on me, and you have wasted a lot in a futile attempt to invent some.

Grow a spine and honest disagreement and I'll be around with a light on for you.

I asked for a citation. Shockingly, you don't have one, maybe because you don't know what vulgar means?

You spammed threads a month ago or w/e it was about how you were chained and needed to be freed. Now you are talking about how you, unlike others, get the freedom of unchained. So what changed, why are you free now but weren't then?

They reverted back to the big spam lie. The reason they never offer proof of that accussation is that they are the ones repeating, spamming, a lie about me being a spammer. A classic liars reversal, using accussation to lie and deny.

Meanwhile, I simply just have to observe and report upon your posts in real time and as they have accumulated to support my claim. Kerowo and gambool have no honest disagreement with me and can't win with dishonesty.

So you all are the spammers, repeatedly spamming lies. Just the observable facts, I don't blame you for it.

Shut up ******

Sup Spank!

Fly: producing fresh flyspeck by complaining about the 'guessing' of other peoples views (in the clock thread).

Dude hangs around with Ike's a lot. Must be just like him. Pretty sure he is in favor of doing incapacitated drunk girls.

Hey! Heard any good jokes lately?

How's your vagina doing? I tried to leave it as I found it when slipped out from being tucked up in there.

Which means you're not saying if it's right or wrong, but that it seems reasonable?

Just to get on the same page with you as far as what you mean by rationalization instead of justification.

Oh, and I have no idea what "it" is at the moment, slipped my mind.

Did you get punished for disagreeing with pvn in that thread a few days ago?

I gave myself a much deserved punch in the goolies.

He's bleating about posting like an adult now.

Good times. Have to love Fly.

Lol. I watched Mel Brooks movies and laughed at mr wookie during every stereotype joke. Justice was served upon me in copious laughter.

The only downside is the participated thread feature on tapatalk is pretty much useless to me now unless I can figure out how to un-participate from politics alto threads

Still we got see the kind of whiny nittiness which makes pvn's avatars shake. Lol.

I don't know, basically just talking about it and trying to figure out just how to think about it from a proper perspective.

You make it sound like my day job. This about that DUI topic? Anyway, I thought the secret was not to fool yourself about drinking and drunkedness.

Be like a carpenter, measure your drinks twice and don't drive once they don't add up. Yes, it sounds too easy which means it must be that easy to avoid drinking and driving under the influence.

Yeah, I guess. I'm pretty good at the counting thing too. Problem is, that method is actually not fool proof at all. There are tons of factors that could leave you driving over the limit, which is why all those charts and calculators have disclaimers like this:

"The calculations provided here may not represent your true BAC and should not be relied on as an indicator of whether you are capable of driving. Without belaboring a point made many times before, the best approach is to avoid driving after you drink."

I'm considering doing what Jbro suggested in that thread, and shoot for 0.05, because I think shooting for 0.08 will leave most people above the limit often enough to be chronic drunk drivers.

If Mel Brooks' stereotype jokes make you laugh in 2015 you have a ****ty sense of humor. You also might be a tad bigoted.

That's narrow-minded and more like bigotry than laughing at classic jokes and cinema.


You don't laugh at what hurts in 2015? I'm not bigoted towards you, if not.

Foldn, after a lifetime of drink-driving, happens upon the BRILLIANT idea of aiming below the legal limit to combat the impreciseness of counting the drinks himself. Still wants to consider it for a few more days though, do some SMP style analysis, make sure it's actually a sound strategy

You could do some scientific drinking at home and film yourself doing roadside tests at various levels for review. In search of the driving while drinking, but not drunk sweet spot.

Ouch, good one Smokey.

Spank, I'm actually currently continuing my teetotaling experiment. No superpowers yet. Maybe give it another month.

Knock knock!

Who's there?