A Forum for Grinches and Ho-Ho-Hoes

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by Gattigap
Even when suggesting the negative, the risk of association and its scarring taint cannot stand. Guardez!

For the love of God, do not challenge him to an economics duel. Anything else, I beg of you. Anything but economics. I'm not sure we can handle another econ duel.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by ironweed
Spanky, Hank is a lot like my cousin who doesn't believe Americans ever walked on the moon. I can protest all I want, but because I wasn't there to see them driving around in the little golf cart, my opinion means nothing. Plus also there was apparently a show on Fox about how it was all a big setup.

I can't prove they walked on the moon, ergo everyone's opinion on the subject is equally valid and I am a condescending elitist to suggest otherwise. This is a very neat little argument and can be applied to almost any historical situation.

Unless you can show Hank polaroids of you standing in the primordial ooze as the lightining hits, you don't have a chance. But then again we know that photos can lie, too.

One good thing about this guy coming back- we now know how mistaken we were when our image of TROLL was fluffy or NotMe-

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
For the love of God, do not challenge him to an economics duel. Anything else, I beg of you. Anything but economics. I'm not sure we can handle another econ duel.

Did someone say econ duel?

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by ironweed
Spanky, Hank is a lot like my cousin who doesn't believe Americans ever walked on the moon. I can protest all I want, but because I wasn't there to see them driving around in the little golf cart, my opinion means nothing. Plus also there was apparently a show on Fox about how it was all a big setup.

I can't prove they walked on the moon, ergo everyone's opinion on the subject is equally valid and I am a condescending elitist to suggest otherwise. This is a very neat little argument and can be applied to almost any historical situation.

Unless you can show Hank polaroids of you standing in the primordial ooze as the lightining hits, you don't have a chance. But then again we know that photos can lie, too.

Who was the cameraman who shot the film of Armstrong's first steps on the moon?

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
One good thing about this guy coming back- we now know how mistaken we were when our image of TROLL was fluffy or NotMe-

Ironweed didn't have to return for us to see that you are a halfbreed troll.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
Ironweed didn't have to return for us to see that you are a halfbreed troll.

cool. truce is over- and I've got a boat load of fat jokes built up.......

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
cool. truce is over- and I've got a boat load of fat jokes built up.......

Heaven forfend!

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
Heaven forfend!

Ain't no solace in your religous fictions- I will attack you with the inevitability of the big bang.

[Spanky]

There is so much insider stuff going on I can't understand half of what is being said. How long have you guys been doing this?

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by Spanky
There is so much insider stuff going on I can't understand half of what is being said. How long have you guys been doing this?

Me? A couple weeks.

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
Who was the cameraman who shot the film of Armstrong's first steps on the moon?

Exactly. This is why I believe that there is no war in Iraq. In fact, I don't believe there is a place called "Iraq," because I have never been there and the pictures are all obviously poorly-photoshopped fakes taken in Mexico somewhere.*

The moral here is that you can never be too careful when some egghead starts trying to sell you a bill of goods.

* Been to Tijajuana, but I can't vouch for the other bits now that I think about it . . .

[Gattigap]

Originally posted by Spanky
There is so much insider stuff going on I can't understand half of what is being said. How long have you guys been doing this?

Yes. I've commented before about this site collapsing under the weight of its self-referential ways. It's an affectation we need to control better.

The best way to get it is simply to ask. Or, just read it for a while. After a short time, you're immersed in the storyline, and you'll notice that the themes become repetitive, somewhat like a soap opera.

Eventually, you'll recognize Hank as James Stenbeck in ATWT, and that some other participants will work their way through friendships and romances that they cybernetically (or literally) consummate. Unfortunately, eventually such characters run through the entire remaining cast, and watching their thrashing about at the realization that there really is noone else to fuck, and then turn on and torch their cyberloves with the searing pain of a thousand vagina denatas,* is somewhat sad.

But I digress. Hang around, it'll all become clear soon enough.

Gattigap










*Shit! Did it again. Apologies.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by Spanky
There is so much insider stuff going on I can't understand half of what is being said. How long have you guys been doing this?

This board was founded about two years ago. We're an offshoot of the greedy boards over at infirmation.com, which were started in 1999 or 2000. There are some people who've been around since the yahoo days of the late 90s. I've been posting with these people since 2000. I can quit anytime I want to. I promise.

etfg

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Spanky
There is so much insider stuff going on I can't understand half of what is being said. How long have you guys been doing this?

I'm the newber. I started some time in '02. I'm not sure how long the rest of these losers have been at it.

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
I'm the newber. I started some time in '02. I'm not sure how long the rest of these losers have been at it.

Strong words from someone with over 5000 posts. And it looks like you ain't the newber anymore, either.