that was truly utterly pathetic. unsurprising given his views itt show what kind of person he is but ffs the entitlement and childish crying are just amazing to me.

also great how he tries to change his argument in the middle after criticism. bro, we have your words on the forum. just so typical of these conservative types.

Fly, this is some Trump-level performance art. Really chefskiss.jpg worthy.

Just keep bull****ting and repeating lies even though the evidence is there for everyone to see. Most won't be arsed up enough to go back and re-read my post and even if they do, if you spew your bull**** enough, eventually it might become believable.

So, let's see what we've got here:


Of course you did. I don't remember a "Sorry Melk, you were talking about prison time and in direct response to that I copied some stuff about prosecutions. My bad."

Here's repeated misquote #1. To remind you, here's what I acutally said:

There is some important context here. Stuff like, "first one I've heard of", "I haven't looked very hard", "you may be able to" and "find a handful". Like I said, just find a literate human and get them to explain it to you. I get that the English language can be tough sometimes, but this is not one of those times.



And now we move on to repeated misquote #2:

Here's what I actually said:


Reducing that to "false rape claims go unprosecuted" means you're either disingenuous or not too bright. But I'm sure if you keep repeating maybe it will become believable.

So was my sister, lighten up Francis.

Yes, you did hedge quite a bit. But I think it would probably be helpful for you to reflect on the fact that you defaulted to a pretty misogynistic premise without bothering to subject it to any scrutiny.

Is this an imagined premise or one I actually wrote? If the latter, please quote the exact words of the premise.

I'm assuming you're not going to take the disingenuous Fly-style approach, so I guess we can try to engage on this in a reasonable way.

I'm guessing you're referring to:

If that's misogynistic, I think you're probably throwing that around a little too liberally.


On the other hand, if you're referring to this:

If you want to call it hedging, I can't stop you. I'd call it writing what I meant.

If you're not blinded by whatever ailment Fly has got, what do you think is the most reasonable interpretation of the above?

1. I think that literally no one has ever done prison time for a false rape accusation.

2. I think that someone doing time for a false rape accusation is hard to find and extremely rare, which is why I have never heard of it.

Hint for Fly

I was referring to this:

And by scrutiny, I mean for example that you didn't consider that you've never heard of a prosecution for a false rape accusation in part because deliberately false rape accusations are rare to begin with.

But also, by "premise" I'm not just referring to your exact word choice, I'm referring to the attitudes that are pretty strongly implied by the way you responded, and your subsequent followups.

one more edit: and when I say reflection, I mean that I honestly think it's good to reflect on how you came to make that assumption. I don't mean you're a horrible person. I've realized over the years that I've had plenty of sexist attitudes, or that I've been casually racist about things in the past and I didn't realize because it never occurred to me to think about them more deeply.

I think we're heading off in to fly territory, here. You're imagining stuff that isn't there. I never said false accusations are common. They are rare. I'm pretty sure I've posted almost those exact words somewhere before (and no I'm not going to bet on it largely because I suck with the search function).

That's definitely part of why I haven't heard of them. No argument here. The other part is that when they do happen, the end result is rarely jail time.

I'll state it once more, just in case it's unclear: False rape accusations are very rare. Now you can set aside what ever you think I'm "strongly implying" but didn't actually say.

This is normally point when Fly just ignores the actual words I type, claims he can see into my soul, knows what I "really think", and inserts his imaginary narrative. If you want to do that too, I can't stop you.

That's probably good advice for everyone. I don't think it applies in this particular case, because I genuinely do believe that false accusations of rape are rare. Maybe I need to state that explicitly in the future lest people other than Fly get the wrong idea.

As I told you before the actual step you should take is not barge into a esoteric and weird statute of limitations argument about Emmett ****ing Till to share with the class this nonsense:

I mean, that's pretty much you offering the bet I want to make, right? There's no way to read that like you want someone to find you something you thought definitely existed, that doesn't make any ****ing sense. Nobody throws it to the crowd and asks people to find a him a case of Lebron James scoring 20 points in an NBA game.

Something you people are always ****ing gobsmacked by is that other people are aware that you had the option not to post at all. That you choose to post, in this thread, about this subject, that you posted at all is information we can use to judge your motivations. And then we can remember that you were ikes' understudy. This isn't some elite ****ing soul read, you threw a gauntlet and now are crying because I picked it up.

5 to 1. $1000. Come on, *****, take my money.

I recall some time ago there was a thread on here in which the phrase "telling on yourself" featured prominently, and then someone said the forum would be improved a lot if people stopped thinking that way, i.e. stopped trying to infer too much from people's posts. I think that's often true.

But, it's also inevitable that people will infer meanings from what you say, or even what you don't say, and how you say it, etc. That's just how communication works, and we're all hardened cynics from all the "raised by wolves" and "just asking questions" routines we see in political discussions. The rate at which non-MRA-types bring up false rape allegations is vanishingly small. So, I don't think it's reasonable to expect people here to entirely cease to read between the lines of people's posts.

But, doing so also obviously leads to miscommunication sometimes. I'm willing to take your word for it that this is the case, so fair enough, carry on. But I'd also say it's definitely useful to know your audience when trying to make observations on some topics.

No, it's not. Like totally not. You should know this because I've explained it several times. But you want to ignore that. Fly gonna fly after all.

This is a website focused on gambling, so I kind of assumed you would be familiar how it generally works. But I guess not.

This is generally not a lead into a bet: "I never heard of X happening, but I haven't really looked and you may be able to find some examples. Let's bet $500 that X never happened"

It's pretty simple. Like I said if you want to go full Trump and keep lying that my post is some sort of a bet offer when it clearly isn't, have at it. Anyone who wants to can read the actual words I wrote.

That's pretty close. Maybe there is hope for you. I don't know about "definitely". Odds are there is probably a case out there somewhere. I just haven't heard of it and it's probably not easy to find. Assuming, you're an attorney, it would probably be easier for you. In any case, I would really like to read the details of such a case. I would find it interesting. Not $500 interesting. Maybe $10 interesting though.

So, if anyone links such a case, I'll just give $10 to the first person via paypal. Free money. Better odds than you offered me.


Not sure what to make of this gibberish. I guess we're at the "Insert Fly's imaginary narrative and hurl a bunch of nonsense insults stage of the game". We both know you're grasping at straws here. Trying to retcon my post into some sort of bet offer is an admirable effort. But, as you're well aware, it's nonsense.

Definitely good advice. In this particular case, I think the main issue is that Fly just has a problem with me personally. So, I'm not sure being even more explicit would have deterred him. However, you're right that it would have been better posting.

Heh. Don't think you're so special. Fly acts like that towards just about anybody he disagrees with.

I'm not even ****ing doing my thing here the dude literally chimed in on a mostly unrelated subject to share an EXTREMELY DANGEROUS myth that the powers that be protect the lying bitches who do false rape accusations. There's no ****ing subtext or soul reading there, it's just garbage. (also, just as a little fun bit of context, who here remembers where Melkerson came down in ikes' big last hurrah thread about Obama and SJWs doing misandry to college date rapists? Everybody guess before you check! For ****'s sake)

And as we have talked about repeatedly, nodding along politely when people share insane reactionary garbage is not good practice. It needs to be confronted directly.

Also, what is it with these people trying the judo flip of calling me Trump for hurting your feelings? Oh yeah. we all know Donald Trump, real hair trigger about MRA ****.

Until yesterday, I hadn't been on this site in ages. Not since Trump was anything but a weird dude espousing birther conspiracies, anyway.

That said, this board seems the appropriate place to post this realization I had. I don't know if others have had it, if this is old news, or if this is some amazing insight about Trump. Basically it's this: Trump appears to me to be a LAG playing with a big stack.

LAGs tilt me at the table, which is one reason why I just play 3/6 or 4/8 limit for recreation these days. And my gut reaction to him is very much like I have when a LAG sits at my table. But, while I usually get super tight or get up and leave. Unfortunately, neither of those is much of an option unless I want to leave the country entirely.

That all said, do others see Trump like this, or am I off my rocker entirely here?

We both know I never said any of this. Of course, you're not going to let facts get in the way of your imagination.

I honestly have no idea what any of this is. I'm sure I wrote some stuff. Just as in this case you probably disregarded the words and just made up some different stuff that you imagined I meant. I'm sure I probably agreed with some of what ikes said. And I guess for you that's forbidden.

I agree. It's probably best to wait until someone actually posts the "reactionary garbage" as you put it and then confront that. Your method of completely disregarding what was actually written, replacing it with something your imagination conjures up, and then confronting that is tiresome and unproductive. I mean you started this whole responding to a point about "doing time" by copying something about prosecutions.

I know that reading has proven incredibly difficult for you in the last day, but I explained this pretty clearly. I'm not calling you Trump because you "hurt my feelings". I'm calling you Trumpish because you have no regard for facts. And that's the most one of the most destructive trends Trump has brought about. The dude doesn't give a **** about actual facts. He just makes up his own reality. You're acting same way.

I wrote some stuff. It's right here for all to see. But you are going to insist that what I wrote is something different. It doesn't matter what everyone can see or read for themselves. You are just going to keep repeating your bull**** and hope it sticks. It's the classic Trump play of "Don't believe everything you hear, believe what I tell you to believe". In your case, it's "Don't believe the actual words Melkerson wrote down, believe my vivid imagination instead".

I don't know, man. I've got a special place in his heart as "ikes' understudy". I'm not sure what the qualifications are since I disagreed with ikes a lot. And I can't imagine anyone would look at my posting since he left and think I'm replacing him. But fly gonna fly.

i've had the same read. it overwhelms people and similar to a good lag when something stops working for him he moves on without saying or doing anything to acknowledge he was wrong, it's like a quick quiet muck in what everybody thought was a big hand brewing, and then he raises utg next hand so there's no satisfaction in even registering the "we got him! ****in BUSTED" because he's already involved in a new pot

and he's a guy who needles the other players as he's winning, like's on the biggest stack at the table boasting, "i've never lost a single hand! i'm amazing! can you believe i never played poker before and i sat down in the big game and i'm winning?? i'm way better than phil ivey and johnny chan put together. they're going to rename bobby's room to donald's room very shortly"

The National Review was a pro-segregationist publication!

FFS I Jake Tapper, but mother****er you can't just retweet this bull**** without challenging it or putting it in context.

ok so I opened that thread and read the op and a couple posts and was just like lol op.

but just now as I went to close the tab from earlier, I realized it was 11 pages long. wtf, I mean, I know oot has died since those days but still, everyone on the first page and a half pretty much agreed and even op accepted his douchness.

so what happened? ok, nothing better to do, I guess I will read on. and then it happens as I am half scrolling/half skimming.

it hits me like a ton of bricks. its slices me like knife.

The Steve Schmidt podcast where he and the unbelievably annoying sidekick condescendingly cackled with condescension at silly liberals who think the government should pay for health care was a nice reminder for me that the never trump GOPers are absolutely not our friends.

lol, I swear to FSM I was trying to remember that account name when something worthwhile distracted me.

wowww if you missed this gem take another look.

oh man, here it is

hidden gems for sure.

Lots of people hold weird grudges/pet peeves, but wil just getting furious over Serena Williams doing a dance to the point where he got himself banned is one of the weirdest I've seen. Who even remembers that kind of page D-33 sports news even a day later, much less years?