Re:please help stop the spamming of cov bbs by Mo.
« Reply #1 on: 2011-03-09 02:46:52 »
[Blunderov] I would but I don't see an 'abstain' option. My guess is that anyone who is not either Hermit, Mermaid or Mo would, and should, feel more comfortable with that one. I certainly do. </fin>
[Blunderov] I would but I don't see an 'abstain' option. My guess is that anyone who is not either Hermit, Mermaid or Mo would, and should, feel more comfortable with that one. I certainly do. </fin>
Re:please help stop the spamming of cov bbs by Mo.
« Reply #3 on: 2011-03-10 21:36:11 »
Good Evening Mermaid,
Yep, I'm just not gonna vote in your stupid troll poll. I still think you are a "1" for Church of Virus community Meridion purposes, but since you had some minor decency to post this in the "free for all" section instead spamming the Doctrine boards yet again, I'll give you one direct response. I don't think that Hermit is the homophobe here. I think you are. Not an egregious homophobe who actually would have supported the prosecution and castration of Alan Turing, but I can easily see you either standing idly by, or encouraging others to apathetically not get involved in such matters where basic empathy should otherwise prevail. Or perhaps your homophobia is the kind which encourages some people to just stay in the closet where other romantic relationships are publicly endorsed, yet another hypocritical turn against empathy.
I really don't know the details of your various hypocrisies and apathies, In any case it stinks, and I think it's unfortunate that Hermit still imagines you to be a "9" in his Meridion ratings. I think it's his loyalty to you which has caused him to assert that homophobic argument in the past against sainting Alan Turing rather than any genuine sentiments on his own part. I mean really . . . reject Alan Turing as a saint or abstain just because some people in the world might also happen to consider him a gay icon. WTF?! Whose idea was that? I don't really know the answer to that, so I'm just asking.
I once called you a "stupid cunt" as you seem to never forget anymore. I'm not claiming that was a mature thing for me to do, but somehow I'm just not feeling any regrets for having done so, especially after your free wheeling insults and ad hominems against me ("moron" and "fucker" come to mind for just a start) and your penchants for shitting and spamming the BBS wherever to appease your silliest whims. Your latest posts on the Saint Alan Turing thread don't have anything to do with either Turing or Doctrine. Not all conversations in the #virus channel are appropriate for the BBS. They are of course both publicly accessible, but different things are appropriate in different places.
I assume you wouldn't take shit in your kitchen sink, nor would you retrieve someone else's turd out the toilet and place it on your dining room table for group discussion. So if that kind of behavior wouldn't be appropriate in your own house, why do you think that's appropriate in public? So perhaps I haven't called you a "stupid cunt" yet this year, . . . you did after all post this troll poll in the free for all section instead of the doctrine section . . . but you're still a "1" or even a zero to me as far as this online community goes.
I've met you in person once, and you were fine enough as those things go. I wouldn't be surprised to know that you are a nice enough person "in real life", and perhaps you aren't really a stupid cunt in person, but I don't really know you that way, so perhaps this online persona of yours is the more sincere. In any case, your online behavior is appalling, and that's mostly how I know you. I'm certainly no angel myself, however your willingness to drag third, fourth, etc. parties into your shallow drama games have earned you ever sinking Meridion ratings here, and not just from me.
Re:please help stop the spamming of cov bbs by Mo.
« Reply #4 on: 2011-03-11 14:48:07 »
i think chat logs are totally appropriate for the BBS.
for example...from the chatlogs...just after you posted this glorious reply.
[...] 20:11:50 MoEnzyme heh. Okay, I actually responded to Mermaid. And whether or any of y'all think it was actually the right thing to do . . . 20:12:13 MoEnzyme There's no way anyone could imagine that it was actually inappropriate. 20:13:08 MoEnzyme After all, it was her trolling thread which she started, and it was in the Free for all section and not in the Doctrine section. 20:14:06 MoEnzyme So as far as I'm concerned she chose the bare knuckled approach, and she's more than asked for it. Including me in the subject line even. 20:15:36 MoEnzyme So I'm just not thinking I'm going to have any regrets. 20:16:28 MoEnzyme As per Sat's and my previous discussion here in #virus . . . if a crazy bitch really wants to jump my shit, then it's perfectly fine to kick her in the cunt. 20:16:46 MoEnzyme It certainly follows all the martial arts ethics. 20:17:05 MoEnzyme Plus it's the Free for all section, so WTF? [end Mo rant]
this proves that you(and possibly sat too) are mentally unstable. it dawned upon me, after reading that little nugget from you and sat about 'kick her in the cunt'...that it makes no sense to take you seriously. or attempt a reply. or your slanderous allegation of 'homophobe' to heart.
#virus chatlogs are public. if you think they shouldnt be reproduced elsewhere, turn loglady off. i am sure you know how. clearly the logs exist only as a record for all of the congregation to know what chatter goes on outside the bbs.
perhaps you could open a channel called #kickherinthecunt or #gangrape(this conversation of you and sat engaging in a rape fantasy about me is recorded in the chat logs too) or whatever it is you and sat fantasise about in another channel and turn off loglady. this way it wont be public. how does this sound to you?
Yep, I'm just not gonna vote in your stupid troll poll. I still think you are a "1" for Church of Virus community Meridion purposes, but since you had some minor decency to post this in the "free for all" section instead spamming the Doctrine boards yet again, I'll give you one direct response. I don't think that Hermit is the homophobe here. I think you are. Not an egregious homophobe who actually would have supported the prosecution and castration of Alan Turing, but I can easily see you either standing idly by, or encouraging others to apathetically not get involved in such matters where basic empathy should otherwise prevail. Or perhaps your homophobia is the kind which encourages some people to just stay in the closet where other romantic relationships are publicly endorsed, yet another hypocritical turn against empathy.
I really don't know the details of your various hypocrisies and apathies, In any case it stinks, and I think it's unfortunate that Hermit still imagines you to be a "9" in his Meridion ratings. I think it's his loyalty to you which has caused him to assert that homophobic argument in the past against sainting Alan Turing rather than any genuine sentiments on his own part. I mean really . . . reject Alan Turing as a saint or abstain just because some people in the world might also happen to consider him a gay icon. WTF?! Whose idea was that? I don't really know the answer to that, so I'm just asking.
I once called you a "stupid cunt" as you seem to never forget anymore. I'm not claiming that was a mature thing for me to do, but somehow I'm just not feeling any regrets for having done so, especially after your free wheeling insults and ad hominems against me ("moron" and "fucker" come to mind for just a start) and your penchants for shitting and spamming the BBS wherever to appease your silliest whims. Your latest posts on the Saint Alan Turing thread don't have anything to do with either Turing or Doctrine. Not all conversations in the #virus channel are appropriate for the BBS. They are of course both publicly accessible, but different things are appropriate in different places.
I assume you wouldn't take shit in your kitchen sink, nor would you retrieve someone else's turd out the toilet and place it on your dining room table for group discussion. So if that kind of behavior wouldn't be appropriate in your own house, why do you think that's appropriate in public? So perhaps I haven't called you a "stupid cunt" yet this year, . . . you did after all post this troll poll in the free for all section instead of the doctrine section . . . but you're still a "1" or even a zero to me as far as this online community goes.
I've met you in person once, and you were fine enough as those things go. I wouldn't be surprised to know that you are a nice enough person "in real life", and perhaps you aren't really a stupid cunt in person, but I don't really know you that way, so perhaps this online persona of yours is the more sincere. In any case, your online behavior is appalling, and that's mostly how I know you. I'm certainly no angel myself, however your willingness to drag third, fourth, etc. parties into your shallow drama games have earned you ever sinking Meridion ratings here, and not just from me.
Re:please help stop the spamming of cov bbs by Mo.
« Reply #5 on: 2011-03-11 17:51:49 »
Mermaid:
Quote:
i think chat logs are totally appropriate for the BBS.
for example...from the chatlogs...just after you posted this glorious reply.
It's your thread. You created it, and it's in the "Free for All" section, so if you want to pepper it up with chatlogs you didn't participte in that's your business. On the BBS, the description clearly defines the Free for All section as "Feel free to talk about anything and everything in this board."
However, the Saint Alan Turing thread in the Doctrine section of the BBS is an entirely different matter. I'm sure even someone of your weak intellect can tell the difference.
I would only add that you've taken this out of context since Sat wasn't actually present in the #virus when I typed this, so you're taking it out of this context is an inaccurate implication of Sat. You haven't participated in any discussions with Sat and I lately there. You don't even know who was actually present when this one was posted, so you demonstrate your carelessness for context yet again. Personally I almost never post chatlogs to the BBS where I didn't actually participate in the discussion because otherwise they are too easily misunderstood and out of context. I have recently posted many chatlogs under many subjects on the BBS, which I ACTUALLY participated in. Posting chatlogs which you didn't participate in is generally a trolling move.
Yes, you CAN do lot's of things in public, but that doesn't means that they are a good idea. So now you have not only shown your spamming ethic, but now you are showing your trolling ethic. Of course I already knew that about you, but you've helpfully repeated these behaviors now for any in the audience less familiar with you. You are certainly predictable that way.
So I think you've gotten all the attention you'll receive from me on this thread.
Re:please help stop the spamming of cov bbs by Mo.
« Reply #7 on: 2011-03-11 21:27:27 »
Oh, I see. You want to make sure you have the last word? Well it's your thread so take it. Another problem is this snippet references an earlier #virus chat which you didn't post, so not only is Sat not present for this string where you carelessly and wrongfully implicate him, but nobody gets to see the previous conversation which puts this one in context. So far from showing any psychoanalytic skills on your part, it really it doesn't mean anything except to show yet one more way that you're a contextless spamming troll. How many more ways can we point out how trollish your behavior is? Well, I could go on and on and on, but I can see that you really want the last word.
Mermaid's context-free paste: Quote:
i think chat logs are totally appropriate for the BBS.
for example...from the chatlogs...just after you posted this glorious reply.
[...] 20:11:50 MoEnzyme heh. Okay, I actually responded to Mermaid. And whether or any of y'all think it was actually the right thing to do . . . 20:12:13 MoEnzyme There's no way anyone could imagine that it was actually inappropriate. 20:13:08 MoEnzyme After all, it was her trolling thread which she started, and it was in the Free for all section and not in the Doctrine section. 20:14:06 MoEnzyme So as far as I'm concerned she chose the bare knuckled approach, and she's more than asked for it. Including me in the subject line even. 20:15:36 MoEnzyme So I'm just not thinking I'm going to have any regrets. 20:16:28 MoEnzyme As per Sat's and my previous discussion here in #virus . . . if a crazy bitch really wants to jump my shit, then it's perfectly fine to kick her in the cunt. 20:16:46 MoEnzyme It certainly follows all the martial arts ethics. 20:17:05 MoEnzyme Plus it's the Free for all section, so WTF? [end Mo rant]
so you can go dig up yet more conversations in which you never participated to try and build your case, but that's not really going anywhere. These are live chats you weren't there for, which you will never be able to put in context - and we aren't going to help you. That's what makes yours such a trollish undertaking in your vain attempts to make your troll poll actually mean something.
Mermaid requests: Quote:
As long as you are sure that you are done. When you are done, you are done. Keep us informed.
This is really my last post on your troll poll thread. This is me informing you that I am done. This last issue about your misuse of chat logs on the BBS is effectively now covered in the FAQ section: FAQ BBS Etiquette Collection
So please, by all means take the last word and make it interesting instead of just repeating yourself.
Or not
-MoEnzyme
ps. 3/13/20011: I'm going to borrow a page out of Hermit's recent BBS playbook and go ahead and add a ps to this message even though I know Hermit has already responded to it in the next reply in this thread. Yeah, I know that Hermit may scream "Corruption!", but it isn't anything that Hermit hasn't already done in the last week or so himself so I'm not going to feel bad about it. Plus I promised Mermaid that she could have the "last word" on this thread, and though Hermit seems to have already stolen that from her with the next reply on this thread, I wouldn't want to add my own complicity in that theft-of-a-last-word. So really all I wanted to do was to point Hermit towards my special send-off message on my own free-for-all thread at: http://www.churchofvirus.org/bbs/index.php?board=1;action=display;threadid=43681;start=15;boardseen=1
Yes I know it is a rather long postscript, but then so was Hermit's excessively long postscript he added after I had already addressed his original posting on the BBS several times over. So for your reading and viewing pleasure I'll just past the whole thing in here too.
Hermit today on another thread said the following (among other things)
Quote:
Failing to recognise his own contributions to the conflagrations, Mo Enzyme seems to have a vast number of suggestions and even more advice on "how to keep shitfests off the BBS". He apparently has quite a lot to say to the Hermits even though we have repeatedly said that nothing he has to say here is of any interest whatsoever to us.
Given that his posting behaviour is becoming more and more obsessive, perhaps Mo Enzyme should just shut up.
end-quote.
[Mo] Well okay then. I'll give Hermit my little send-off here and now. To Hermit, one of my favorite missing persons:
Do you hear me Do you care Do you hear me Do you care
My lips are moving and the sound's coming out The words are audible but I have my doubts That you realize what has been said You look at me as if you're in a daze It's like the feeling at the end of the page when you realize you don't know what you just read
What are words for when no one listens anymore What are words for when no one listens What are words for when no one listens it's no use talkin at all
I might as well go up and talk to a wall 'cause all the words are having no effect at all It's a funny thing am I all alone
Something has to happen to change the direction What little filters through is giving you the wrong impression It's a sorry state I say to myself
What are words for when no one listens anymore What are words for when no one listens What are words for when no one listens it's no use talkin at all
Do you hear me Do you care Do you hear me Do you care
Let me get by Over your dead body Hope to see you soon When will I know Doors three feet wide with no locks open Walking always backwards in the faces of strangers Time could be my friend But it's less than nowhere now less than nowhere now less than nowhere now now ow ow ow
Pursue it further and another thing you'll find Not only are they deaf and dumb they could be going blind and no one notices I think I'll dye my hair blue
Media overload bombarding you with action It's getting near impossible to cause distraction Someone answer me before I pull out the plug
What are words for when no one listens anymore What are words for when no one listens What are words for when no one listens it's no use talkin at all
What are words for when no one listens anymore What are words for when no one listens What are words for when no one listens it's no use talkin at all
Do you hear me Do you care Do you hear me Do you care tell me what are words for Do you hear me tell me what are words for Do you care tell me what are words for Do you hear me so tell me what are words for Do you care so tell me what are words for Do you hear me tell me what are words for so tell me what are words for Do you care so tell me what are words for Do you hear me tell me what are words for so tell me what are words for Do you care so tell me what are words for
Re:please help stop the spamming of cov bbs by Mo.
« Reply #8 on: 2011-03-13 17:54:44 »
Failing to recognise his own contributions to the conflagrations, Mo Enzyme seems to have a vast number of suggestions and even more advice on "how to keep shitfests off the BBS". He apparently has quite a lot to say to the Hermits even though we have repeatedly said that nothing he has to say here is of any interest whatsoever to us.
Given that his posting behaviour is becoming more and more obsessive, perhaps Mo Enzyme should just shut up.
Mo Enzyme has gone to great lengths to point out how others are criticising Mermaid for spamming, by reducing her Meridion rating.
While Mermaid may have had her moments, in any civilized environment, it would be Mo Enzyme that would be penalized for his words and actions in this affray. If this is not the case, it is a sad comment on the CoV. Which is, of course, why neither Hermit anticipates being involved here outside of communicating sporadically via IM with old friends who apparently don't do email.
In case the point is missed, this has nothing at all to do with Mermaid, who Mo Enzyme is apparently accusing of many things without any foundation whatsoever, and rather more, but still relatively little, to do with Mo Enzyme, who has apparently gone completely off the rails*, but mostly to do with the inability of the CoV to manage situations such as this, yet remain civilized, or failing that, to penalize the appropriate parties.
A pity.
PS Blunderov, abstaining in the face of what Mo Enzyme has been doing all over the CoV is to support the status quo. And as noted, nobody civilized could possibly find the status quo a pretty thing. *repeatedly projecting dishonest interpretations and conclusions diametrically opposed to the carefully framed words of others and harping obsessively on issues and words that others are carefully avoiding classes as going off the rails.
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. - Steven Weinberg, 1999
Re:please help stop the spamming of cov bbs by Mo.
« Reply #9 on: 2011-03-14 05:18:12 »
Hello Hermit  It is my temperament to wish to first do no harm, if possible.
The topic is Mo’s alleged spamming*. First of all, it is not clear to me which putative letter of what putative law is allegedly being violated here. Second, the very title “Re: please help stop the spamming of cov bbs by Mo” is a clear ad hominem and is unacceptable to me. I might, perhaps, be in favour of a poll which proposes a definition of exactly what spamming is, and which seeks a consensus on how it should be moderated in respect of ALL who might offend, not just Mo. I must therefore decline to do the harm that I weyken would arise from affording this divisive proposition any consideration.
I don’t do IRC but it seems to me that the epicentre of this dispute is there. Perhaps that would be a good place to get it sorted out? Mo seems open to reconciliation. As far as I can tell, he seems to be sticking to only his contention that the sexuality of Turing is an irrelevancy? I agree. How this ever became a bone of contention I do not know and neither do I care to enquire as I see no profit in feeding a flame war which is about something that doesn’t matter. What does matter are the aggrieved whom I think would serve the interests of the wider CoV better to talk it out privately amongst themselves. I think that would be a civilised thing to. I’m happy to participate if that would helpful.
Forum spamming is a breach of netiquette where users repeat the same word or phrase over and over, but differs from multiple posting in that spamming is usually a willful act which sometimes has malicious intent. This is a common trolling technique. It can also be traditional spam, unpaid advertisements that are in breach of the forum's rules. Spammers utilize a number of illicit techniques to post their spam, including the use of botnets. Some forums consider concise, comment-oriented posts spam, for example Thank you, Cool or I love it.
Re:please help stop the spamming of cov bbs by Mo.
« Reply #10 on: 2011-03-14 10:29:08 »
Dear Blunderov
J' Regret. J' adoube.
Neither Hermit chose the word "spam", a word with as many meanings as the alleged meat filling the innocent can from which it is derived contains potential sources. Still, given how "spam" was used here by Mermaid, the Hermits, "listening generously", interpreted it to mean that Mermaid perceived, as do both Hermits, that Mo Enzyme had obsessively invoked either "Hermit" or "Mermaid" on both the BBS and IRC over the course of over a year. We took into consideration the fact that Mo Enzyme has repeatedly stated things which were palpably untrue, projected things contrary to what has been explicitly stated, imputed motives that are blatantly false, and asserted things that are violently prejudicial, despite the fact that both Hermits and the Mermaid elected to withdraw from active participation in the CoV during the process of and consequent on the illumination of Turing. Thus, in our opinion, Mo Enzyme has had absolutely no justification to attack either Hermits or Mermaid, forcing responses here against our wills, in order to attempt to maintain our dignity.
Just as a person who has murdered his parents cannot validly fall upon the mercy of the court due to his being an orphan, and as the person who has destroyed evidence of a crime has no recourse to the benefits that availability of the evidence might have provided him, so too the person destroying the integrity of a discussion has no right to assert what it might have said. From this it follows, that, as Mo Enzyme deliberately destroyed the integrity of the illumination process by editing and deleting posts and threads after they had been replied to, and as there is no log of alterations to the BBS or Meridion (unlike the Wiki which is why the previously agreed structured illumination process was to have occurred on the Wiki), there is no longer a clear trail of his deliberate actions to manipulate the process or the voting weights, but as he was the one tampering with the evidence and results, and has acknowledged this, he is left with no plausible defence against these charges.
Is any of this an "ad hominem"? Absolutely not. Once again taking recourse to Wikipedia, as I have done before, "An ad hominem (Latin: "to the man"), short for argumentum ad hominem, is an attempt to link the validity of a premise to a characteristic or belief of the opponent advocating the premise. The ad hominem is a classic logical fallacy, but it is not always fallacious; in some instances, questions of personal conduct, character, motives, etc., are legitimate and relevant to the issue." In this case, neither the Hermits nor the Mermaid are interested in an "argument" or discussing any "premise" (which, per se, eliminates any possibility of ad hominem), but rather are calling on sanctions against Mo Enzyme in the face of failure of what we understood to be the formal moderation methodology, and to support this, have discussed Mo Enzyme's "personal conduct", repeated attacks which speak directly to his "character", and to a more limited extent, to his beliefs as expressed by him when he asserted that the illumination of Turing would "force us [ Hermit : The CoV ] to take a stand on homosexuality" all of which go to the heart of the issues raised here and which again prima facie eliminates any possibility of argumentum ad hominem. Hermit's repeated calls for sanctions to be applied to Mo Enzyme fit into this same category.
While neither of the Hermits thinks that this discussion really belongs in public on the BBS, as it does tend to throw the organization and individuals in a poor light, if not disrepute, we have not chosen the venue or the topics visited since it became clear that Mo Enzyme would not be sanctioned for his abuse of process or others; that discussions and Meridion were subject to abuse without penalty; that processes we imagined had been instituted to mitigate this kind of personal attack are not being followed; and that attacks upon others in our fora are apparently no longer subject to moderation. All of which explains our withdrawal from active participation, and on the basis that sauces do not show partiality to sexuality - even if the CoV might - fully justifies posting as proximally to perceived damaging material as necessary and possible.
Finally, a note primarily from the Hermit, as Hermitess does not perceive herself as sufficiently knowledgeable about Turing to comment, which, while perhaps sufficiently "off topic" from this thread to be called "topic spamming" (but you introduced it), seems still to be relevant.
The CoV did illuminate Turing, and as Mo Enzyme successfully (for at least the Hermits) argued that this meant that the CoV would be "take[ing] a stand on homosexuality", and as this particular argument was raised prior to the illumination, the illumination of Turing was, at least in part, undeniably about this for us, which is why we first opposed, and then, after withdrawing our active participation in response to our perception that MoEnzyme had massively abused the system and individuals (including at least the Hermits and Mermaid), abstained from voting. Nonetheless, in illuminating Turing the CoV has, as Mo Enzyme previously argued, "take[n] a stand" (i.e. adopted a dogma). As repeatedly observed by me, this is not something that can be addressed away merely by asserting that the dogma is beneficial (even if this is true); and at this point there is no way I can see to avoid this coupling, particularly as, as Mo Enzyme argued during the illumination process, this is apparently how the vast majority of Americans that have heard of Turing perceive him (teh Gey icon).
Prior to the injection of these topics, coupled with associated rudeness and invective, along with the dishonesty and manipulation acknowledged by Mo Enzyme, I saw Turing's personal perspective, readily apparent to anyone who has read his writings and statements, as well as those of people near to him, that sexuality is a private thing, not subject to the judgement of society and relevant only to immediate participants and potential participants, as being akin to my own, guaranteeing tolerance for all people and actions not causing unjustifiable harm and as such, something to be cherished and advocated and completely compatible with the principles of the CoV; which, along with his vast contributions to mankind, the full value of which is probably far from being grasped, made me perceive Turing as an ideal for myself and Saint for the CoV. If nothing else, Mo Enzyme destroyed the pedestal (pederastle (?!?) perhaps, as the age of consent for male-on-male sex acts in the UK was only reduced from 21 in 2001). upon which I had raised him, and forced me to realize how far my perception diverged from that of the unwashed in this "great nation under educated", and even from that of some members of the CoV (for which insight I do not particularly thank him). Unfortunately, as in so many other things in life, this turns out to be, for me at least, a trapdoor function. Having raised the issue, there is no easy way to move past it. Which, together with the ugly nature of the repeated demonstrations of a lack of ability to moderate ourselves, raises a huge obstacle to my active involvement here.
Still, I count myself fortunate. Unlike Mermaid, I don't have to read a stream of invective levelled at me, or read about Sat and Mo discussing perpetrating a rape on me on the forums of the CoV and engaging in other highly inappropriate behavior in public and private. How ignoring such levels of personal assault, or even abstaining from voting for this unofficial poll by Mermaid requesting the CoV to ask a person who has repeatedly abused the name of others for no good reason to refrain from continuing to do so can possibly be construed as "doing no harm" leaves me wondering what a person could write that would constitute a "harm"? For me, that threshold was reached over a year ago.
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. - Steven Weinberg, 1999
Re:please help stop the spamming of cov bbs by Mo.
« Reply #11 on: 2011-03-14 12:18:59 »
To Blunderov: I will put it in simple terms.
I don't want to be fodder for Mo or Sat on the bbs or chat. I don't care about Turing's sexuality. I find it very disturbing to be part of this one sided discussion on multiple directions.
Mo or sat wouldn't talk about gang rape or threesomes or call me a stupid cunt to my face. They have repeatedly done so in a public chartroom and on the bbs knowing that I can read it. That it is done for the purpose of Turing illumination fiasco is a flimsy excuse. Then why do they continue to do so?
I have repeatedly stated that:
I don't enjoy it I don't wish to participate in such chatter I have cut all contact from them on all social networks. I have even communicated to sat and lucifer that it was deeply hurtful.(they don't care but at least they are not obsessed)
It is unnerving. It is disturbing. Honestly, it is scary. Never mind that it is slanderous and insulting.
I cannot speak on chat with someone who called me a stupid cunt. For the record..yes..I called mo a 'moron' and 'fucker' in a moment of pure rage when I read the account of sat and mo's gang rape chitchat. I don't regret it..because Mo replied that 'I asked for it'. And how? Because I put up a photograph of myself to my private circle of those I considered friends on facebook(all virians have since been defriended)
I am least impressed by cov as each day passes. I don't want a cyber ghost of me...begin sexually abused.even if verbally. It humiliates me..I did not ask for it.. I have met virians(even if some of them seem to remain apathetic and even find the whole thing amusing) I have met their spouses...I have held their children...and they all know me as mermaid. I don't know want them to know me as that 'stupid cunt'. I want to be left alone. I want this to stop. I have to leave it..on record...that I protested.
Edited to add: never mind being called a homophobe..after Mo has exhausted his energies on that slander with hermit.
2. Please count the number of posts by Mo on hermit or myself...check how many are unsolicited 'replies'. How is it still not spam? I do not understand.
3. To hermit...agreeing with you. Publicly...on turing and re gay icon. I feel pressured to prove every time that... As opposed to popular beliefs and suspicions, we arrived to our opposition to turings illumination as a way for cov to take a stand on homosexuality independently. We did not collude..and even if we did, i dont think we should be tarred and feathered for having a similar point of view. I live in that part of the country where people categorize themselves as 'country gay', 'ghetto gay', 'hipster gay' or simply 'the queen'. I understand people from other parts of the world where GAY=got.aids.yet would find it difficult to believe that many gays would like to be perceived as 'normal' without attention being drawn to them being 'different'. To treat them as I would treat anyone else is the greatest respect I can show them. There is no heterosexual icon for cov. Why should there be a gay icon? It is insulting and condescending, IMO.
If there is anything I regret, it is protesting too much and attempting to defend myself against the accusation that I convinced you to vote against turing illumination. I should have told that it was no ones business..but such are Mo's lawyerly ways to first accuse and put the other in a defensive position.
I could spend all day airing my grievances..but I don't have time.(typing from a mobile device mid commute and might lose signal any minute) I am sure others don't either. I would like toe left out of the obsessive rants and spams by Mo. For real.
20:11:50 MoEnzyme heh. Okay, I actually responded to Mermaid. And whether or any of y'all think it was actually the right thing to do . . . 20:12:13 MoEnzyme There's no way anyone could imagine that it was actually inappropriate. 20:13:08 MoEnzyme After all, it was her trolling thread which she started, and it was in the Free for all section and not in the Doctrine section. 20:14:06 MoEnzyme So as far as I'm concerned she chose the bare knuckled approach, and she's more than asked for it. Including me in the subject line even. 20:15:36 MoEnzyme So I'm just not thinking I'm going to have any regrets. 20:16:28 MoEnzyme As per Sat's and my previous discussion here in #virus . . . if a crazy bitch really wants to jump my shit, then it's perfectly fine to kick her in the cunt. 20:16:46 MoEnzyme It certainly follows all the martial arts ethics. 20:17:05 MoEnzyme Plus it's the Free for all section, so WTF? 20:17:22 MoEnzyme http://www.churchofvirus.org/bbs/index.php?board=1;action=display;threadid=43693;start=0;boardseen=1 20:18:40 MoEnzyme So, if anyone is craving drama, or just too curious to not look, feel free to click the link. You've been fairly warned, so don't be getting pissy with me about it. 20:19:27 MoEnzyme MoEnzyme has quit IRC [Quit: Today is a good day to chat.]
That's he context. It has the URL of a reply directed to me on the bbs. I hope this satisfies the context seekers.
Poll
2 (100%)
Author
Logged
