fox123 Posted 9 December 2008 Posted 9 December 2008 Woohoo - he's back again.I guess the off-license has closed or he's been kicked out of his daughter's bedroom again. [cue semi-literate twat-rant] You seriously are a twat of the highest order. You need to get this obsession about other people's daughters out of your head, its getting a bit repetitive.
Finnegan Posted 9 December 2008 Posted 9 December 2008 He does love the threads about children to a disproportionate level, doesn't he. It's almost like he's got the potential to be a kiddyfiddler. Someone should warn Poynton, I don't think he likes those types.
fox123 Posted 10 December 2008 Posted 10 December 2008 It's almost like he's got the potential to be a kiddyfiddler. Someone should warn Poynton, I don't think he likes those types. That tongue's getting deeper.
Finnegan Posted 10 December 2008 Posted 10 December 2008 That tongue's getting deeper. Down your mother's throat. (Yeah, that's right, Daggers might like a bit of veal, me I'm all about the mutton.)
fox123 Posted 10 December 2008 Posted 10 December 2008 Down your mother's throat. (Yeah, that's right, Daggers might like a bit of veal, me I'm all about the mutton.) I think you need to take a long hard look at your self in the mirror, wash your face and come back when you have something sensible, something less repugnant and something that quite clearly didn't just come out of the play ground.
Finnegan Posted 10 December 2008 Posted 10 December 2008 I think you need to take a long hard look at your self in the mirror, wash your face and come back when you have something sensible, something less repugnant and something that quite clearly didn't just come out of the play ground. I'm 22, not 48. I might not still giggle every time someone farts or says "tits" but I don't quite feel the need to smoke a pipe and read the Guardian, yet. You've been told before, really, if you can't take a bit of silly banter on the chin then you're really in the wrong place. The lad Alex, who you were so quick to brand a decent sort in your leaving post, is the grand champion of stupid, playground insults. Really boy.
fox123 Posted 10 December 2008 Posted 10 December 2008 I'm 22, not 48. I might not still giggle every time someone farts or says "tits" but I don't quite feel the need to smoke a pipe and read the Guardian, yet.You've been told before, really, if you can't take a bit of silly banter on the chin then you're really in the wrong place. The lad Alex, who you were so quick to brand a decent sort in your leaving post, is the grand champion of stupid, playground insults. Really boy. That old chestnut, shut up you tosser For the record I'm sure Mr Kokopops, would not come out with such immature or distasteful remarks against someones Mother, whether he be the grand champion of stupid remarks or not. It's knowing where to draw the line, you clearly do not know that line, yet you use what I said above, the same old chestnut to excuse you of the repugnant bollocks you post.
stez Posted 10 December 2008 Posted 10 December 2008 You seriously are a twat of the highest order.You need to get this obsession about other people's daughters out of your head, its getting a bit repetitive. it is kind of repetitive, in that it's been used twice, but on this occasion it was used to get you to bite, which you did, you'd have been best off ignoring it, instead of giving them more ammunition. (obviously that's just my opinion) That old chestnut, shut up you tosser For the record I'm sure Mr Kokopops, would not come out with such immature or distasteful remarks against someones Mother, whether he be the grand champion of stupid remarks or not. It's knowing where to draw the line, you clearly do not know that line, yet you use what I said above, the same old chestnut to excuse you of the repugnant bollocks you post. i've heard plently from mr kokopops i can assure you of that!
Daggers Posted 10 December 2008 Author Posted 10 December 2008 [cue semi-literate twat-rant] Brilliant - I'm guessing at least one of those posts were.
Zingari Posted 10 December 2008 Posted 10 December 2008 Down your mother's throat. (Yeah, that's right, Daggers might like a bit of veal, me I'm all about the mutton.) me too how about a bit of this ? eh eh ? have you grown up enough in the last few days to allow it now ? ( it was you who was so offended by it last time wasn't it ? or was it concern for the sensibilities of others ? ) or does it still offend you so much you still feel the need to delete it ? do FT members need protection from this sort of filth ? why do we need moderators if the attitude of , "anything goes" on the internet ? why are the ones championing freedoms on the internet seemingly the same ones desperate to be moderators ? (is it some kind of poacher turning gamekeeper syndrome ?) so so so many questions
James. Posted 10 December 2008 Posted 10 December 2008 Is that when you had your tongue wedged firmly up Daggers arse? I think you need to take a long hard look at your self in the mirror, wash your face and come back when you have something sensible, something less repugnant and something that quite clearly didn't just come out of the play ground. Brilliant. I missed you Mr 123.
fox123 Posted 10 December 2008 Posted 10 December 2008 it is kind of repetitive, in that it's been used twice, but on this occasion it was used to get you to bite, which you did, you'd have been best off ignoring it, instead of giving them more ammunition. (obviously that's just my opinion)I know he was after a reaction, the same reaction he was after when he posted this thread. i've heard plently from mr kokopops i can assure you of that! I've no doubt you haven't, its the intent in which it's used and hiding behind - "well it's the internet" that gets a little boring, especially from him, again repetitive. Brilliant - I'm guessing at least one of those posts were. Please Mrs, your hurting my feelings with your constant swipe at any grammatical errors that my be in my posts, please don't put me in detention, or is that your special under-16 class Brilliant.I missed you Mr 123. Didn't your tongue used to be pink as well.
James. Posted 10 December 2008 Posted 10 December 2008 Didn't your tongue used to be pink as well. To be serious just for a minute you'll probably find that I have agreed and disagreed with Daggers on various issues in equal proportion. Sometimes he gets things spot on, other times he doesn't. Like most people really, including me. Quite why you're on this apparent mission to suggest anyone that doesn't DISAGREE with him has their "tongue up his arse" as you so eloquently put it (no playground tanuts here eh!) is beyond me. As I posted in THAT thread from a couple of weeks ago the best thing you could do is take a step back, get a little perspective and come to a game where there's a decent Foxestalk contingent meeting up. Have a beer and laugh, it'll do you good. I imagine you'll pay little attention to this, like the first time I suggested it.
fox123 Posted 10 December 2008 Posted 10 December 2008 To be serious just for a minute you'll probably find that I have agreed and disagreed with Daggers on various issues in equal proportion. Sometimes he gets things spot on, other times he doesn't. Like most people really, including me.Quite why you're on this apparent mission to suggest anyone that doesn't DISAGREE with him has their "tongue up his arse" as you so eloquently put it (no playground tanuts here eh!) is beyond me. As I posted in THAT thread from a couple of weeks ago the best thing you could do is take a step back, get a little perspective and come to a game where there's a decent Foxestalk contingent meeting up. Have a beer and laugh, it'll do you good. I imagine you'll pay little attention to this, like the first time I suggested it. I'm not on any mission, you piped up I made a comment. I have no personal issues with anyone including Daggers (believe it or not), I don't know the man behind the screen, I see what is in black and white and I respond. Someone posted to me in PM not to long ago, it's hard to work out if people are posting things in jest or if their serious. Just because I have an opinion in black and white, does not mean I have some personal vendetta off line. As I previously said in that thread that shalt not be named I would have made the same thread who ever had posted that remark. Also I'd like to know where you come to the conclusion that I hadn't already arranged to meet certain posters for a pre-match beer? I also did read what you said, and I digested it, thank you for your kind words of wisdom, I apologise for not replying sooner.
James. Posted 10 December 2008 Posted 10 December 2008 Also I'd like to know where you come to the conclusion that I hadn't already arranged to meet certain posters for a pre-match beer? I didn't conclude that. If you have then fair play. I also did read what you said, and I digested it, thank you for your kind words of wisdom, I apologise for not replying sooner. If that's sarcastic, there's no need. Apart from taking the piss a bit about your little contradiction regarding playground taunts I'm only trying to help. If it isn't sarcastic then you're very welcome and there's no need to apologise.
fox123 Posted 10 December 2008 Posted 10 December 2008 I didn't conclude that. If you have then fair play.If that's sarcastic, there's no need. Apart from taking the piss a bit about your little contradiction regarding playground taunts I'm only trying to help. If it isn't sarcastic then you're very welcome and there's no need to apologise. So you see it's hard to tell which way to take someone? and for the record I wasn't being sarcastic.
Thracian Posted 10 December 2008 Posted 10 December 2008 Well, while we've all been talking, the ban has been lifted (according to this morning's Metro)!
Ryanside Posted 10 December 2008 Posted 10 December 2008 Sarah Robertson, director of communications for the IWF, stated that in collaboration with the Child Exploitation and Online Protection agency of the UK, the image had been rated as a "1 on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is the least offensive",[32] representing "erotic posing with no sexual activity".[32] On December 9, 2008, the IWF issued a statement reversing their blacklist of Wikipedia Well there we go, file under "least offensive of anything that could be classed as offensive". Its good to see that the IWF will bow to a bit of public pressure and common sense.
Daggers Posted 10 December 2008 Author Posted 10 December 2008 Well, while we've all been talking, the ban has been lifted (according to this morning's Metro)! There we go - common sense prevails. :thumbsup: </thread>
Finnegan Posted 10 December 2008 Posted 10 December 2008 That old chestnut, shut up you tosser For the record I'm sure Mr Kokopops, would not come out with such immature or distasteful remarks against someones Mother, whether he be the grand champion of stupid remarks or not. It's knowing where to draw the line, you clearly do not know that line, yet you use what I said above, the same old chestnut to excuse you of the repugnant bollocks you post. Lmao. What planet are you from? You've really never been on the receiving end of a Yo-Momma (or similar) joke before? Christ alive. I don't even believe you're that sheltered, that naive, or that ignorant - you're just trying to whip up a teacup storm ontop of Mount Molehill. have you grown up enough in the last few days to allow it now ?( it was you who was so offended by it last time wasn't it ? or was it concern for the sensibilities of others ? ) I think it was me that deleted it last time. Purely just 'cos I didn't want to have to fucking look at it, can you blame me?
Zingari Posted 10 December 2008 Posted 10 December 2008 hmmm long may the exploitation of children continue i'd like to know what sort of parents allowed this to happen to their child ( ok it was 30 years ago but she was a victim of exploitation )and how many claiming this great victory would allow their own children to be used in this way hopefully most people would think of their own children today as being too precious to use in this way . does anyone disagree with this ? would anyone on here exploit their children today in this way ? are we in society condoning this behaviour and attitudes towards protecting kids please let me know , i'm very interested . am i so out of touch ? yes i probably am but would rather remain so i'll dismount again from the high horse
Guest Posted 10 December 2008 Posted 10 December 2008 hmmmlong may the exploitation of children continue i'd like to know what sort of parents allowed this to happen to their child ( ok it was 30 years ago but she was a victim of exploitation )and how many claiming this great victory would allow their own children to be used in this way hopefully most people would think of their own children today as being too precious to use in this way . does anyone disagree with this ? would anyone on here exploit their children today in this way ? are we in society condoning this behaviour and attitudes towards protecting kids please let me know , i'm very interested . am i so out of touch ? yes i probably am but would rather remain so i'll dismount again from the high horse I think the point was alluded to earlier that the girl in the picture might have been older than you think. Not all of us matured that quickly, thank you. There is also the question of free will. Didn't a certain well loved and well respected ex Page 3 girl lie about her age when she first begged to be photographed? By the way Daggers, I think you need a little more roughage in your diet.
Alexikokopops Posted 10 December 2008 Posted 10 December 2008 My balls are black and blue. I've just hit them with a mallet. What game am I playing?
DB11 Posted 10 December 2008 Posted 10 December 2008 My balls are black and blue. I've just hit them with a mallet. What game am I playing? One I wouldn't wanna participate in that's for sure!!
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.