CAL'S Column Early September 2011 Edition - Comics General 2 2

[gaz973]

Well, I wasn't trying to pick a fight with you. I thought you might appreciate the humour.

 

I've been an evil person in the past and this is the new, nice me.

[oakman29]

C'mon guys this is Cals mental breakdown thread.

[Flaming_Telepath]

yet I have fallen foul of none of the eBay chat crowd?

 

 

 

Sorry to be the crick in your hitch.

 

 

Oh, come on. You'd fall out with your breakfast.

 

He's just pickin a fight. Par for the course.

 

 

"Par for the course"....

 

No, dear, setting the record straight. I don't "pick fights", though the eternally thin-skinned might think so.

 

As far as picking fights, how about this:

 

I will never post to or about RMA on these boards ever again.

 

You just can't keep your word, can you? I read your post to Cal, and wanted to respond, but, see, I'm a man of my word. If you don't post to/about me, I don't post to/about you.

 

But...you...just...can't...control...yourself.

 

 

But it didn't stop you from 'picking' on me in this thread.

 

Even though you (a) have me on ignore and (b) have declared that we should avoid each another.

 

But...you...just...can't...control...yourself.

 

[gaz973]

yet I have fallen foul of none of the eBay chat crowd?

 

 

 

Sorry to be the crick in your hitch.

 

 

Oh, come on. You'd fall out with your breakfast.

 

He's just pickin a fight. Par for the course.

 

 

"Par for the course"....

 

No, dear, setting the record straight. I don't "pick fights", though the eternally thin-skinned might think so.

 

As far as picking fights, how about this:

 

I will never post to or about RMA on these boards ever again.

 

You just can't keep your word, can you? I read your post to Cal, and wanted to respond, but, see, I'm a man of my word. If you don't post to/about me, I don't post to/about you.

 

But...you...just...can't...control...yourself.

 

 

But it didn't stop you from 'picking' on me in this thread.

 

Even though you (a) have me on ignore and (b) have declared that we should avoid each another.

 

But...you...just...can't...control...yourself.

 

 

But.... surely RMA ignores people that he puts on ignore? I'm sure he's posted such things before?

[RockMyAmadeus]

yet I have fallen foul of none of the eBay chat crowd?

 

 

 

Sorry to be the crick in your hitch.

 

 

My bad for use of the wrong tense.

 

I fell foul of none of the eBay chat crowd.

 

What came after I view with some pride.

 

That really highlights the difference between us, doesn't it?

 

I recognize that it's sad and pathetic that we have no respect for one another.

 

You look at it as a matter of pride.

[RockMyAmadeus]

yet I have fallen foul of none of the eBay chat crowd?

 

 

 

Sorry to be the crick in your hitch.

 

 

Oh, come on. You'd fall out with your breakfast.

 

He's just pickin a fight. Par for the course.

 

 

"Par for the course"....

 

No, dear, setting the record straight. I don't "pick fights", though the eternally thin-skinned might think so.

 

As far as picking fights, how about this:

 

I will never post to or about RMA on these boards ever again.

 

You just can't keep your word, can you? I read your post to Cal, and wanted to respond, but, see, I'm a man of my word. If you don't post to/about me, I don't post to/about you.

 

But...you...just...can't...control...yourself.

 

 

But it didn't stop you from 'picking' on me in this thread.

 

Even though you (a) have me on ignore and (b) have declared that we should avoid each another.

 

But...you...just...can't...control...yourself.

 

 

I know you think you're just soooooo cute with that response, but here's the burst to your bubble:

 

1. Having someone "on ignore" doesn't mean there can't be any interaction.

 

2. I have never made a "I will never post to or about FT ever again" pronouncement, unlike ol' Gaz.

 

3. You feel no qualms about replying to and about me. I would be happy to never interact with you again, but that requires you do the same. Until and if you do, there's no such obligation to not interact with you.

 

Your logic fails. Again.

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

Well, I wasn't trying to pick a fight with you. I thought you might appreciate the humour.

 

I've been an evil person in the past and this is the new, nice me.

 

If it matters, I did appreciate the humor.

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

yet I have fallen foul of none of the eBay chat crowd?

 

 

 

Sorry to be the crick in your hitch.

 

 

Oh, come on. You'd fall out with your breakfast.

 

He's just pickin a fight. Par for the course.

 

 

"Par for the course"....

 

No, dear, setting the record straight. I don't "pick fights", though the eternally thin-skinned might think so.

 

As far as picking fights, how about this:

 

I will never post to or about RMA on these boards ever again.

 

You just can't keep your word, can you? I read your post to Cal, and wanted to respond, but, see, I'm a man of my word. If you don't post to/about me, I don't post to/about you.

 

But...you...just...can't...control...yourself.

 

 

But it didn't stop you from 'picking' on me in this thread.

 

Even though you (a) have me on ignore and (b) have declared that we should avoid each another.

 

But...you...just...can't...control...yourself.

 

 

But.... surely RMA ignores people that he puts on ignore? I'm sure he's posted such things before?

 

Ignore must be mutual, or it serves no purpose. And I don't mean the "ignore function."

 

Someday, there will be a board that has a functional ignore. You put someone on ignore, they can't see anything you post either, either directly or quoted. That will be a very nice board for me.

[seanfingh]

 

I didn't think it was possible, but I am actually wishing for Cal to come back in here . . .

[RockMyAmadeus]

Yeah. Ok. Rrrrrright.

[gaz973]

yet I have fallen foul of none of the eBay chat crowd?

 

 

 

Sorry to be the crick in your hitch.

 

 

Oh, come on. You'd fall out with your breakfast.

 

He's just pickin a fight. Par for the course.

 

 

"Par for the course"....

 

No, dear, setting the record straight. I don't "pick fights", though the eternally thin-skinned might think so.

 

As far as picking fights, how about this:

 

I will never post to or about RMA on these boards ever again.

 

You just can't keep your word, can you? I read your post to Cal, and wanted to respond, but, see, I'm a man of my word. If you don't post to/about me, I don't post to/about you.

 

But...you...just...can't...control...yourself.

 

 

But it didn't stop you from 'picking' on me in this thread.

 

Even though you (a) have me on ignore and (b) have declared that we should avoid each another.

 

But...you...just...can't...control...yourself.

 

 

But.... surely RMA ignores people that he puts on ignore? I'm sure he's posted such things before?

 

Ignore must be mutual, or it serves no purpose. And I don't mean the "ignore function."

 

Someday, there will be a board that has a functional ignore. You put someone on ignore, they can't see anything you post either, either directly or quoted. That will be a very nice board for me.

 

Well, just since I did say that you must have posted something along those lines before...

The ignore button is awesome.

 

It would be even more awesome if people who used it could abide by it and, ya know, leave people they are ignoring alone.

..... which does go against your being the first to rag on FT in this thread.

[gaz973]

I didn't think it was possible, but I am actually wishing for Cal to come back in here . . .

I'm really hoping for a full on RMA/Cal argument here but I'm going to bed now. Keep the home fires burning.

[Old Fashion PB and J]

You people are all insane.

 

Totally, completely insane.

Yet here you sit with us. (thumbs u

Here I sit, all broken hearted....

Your posts are , but you've yet departed.

 

Your meter sucks.

 

Well eff the metric system

Frankly, my dear...I don't give a gram.

I chuckled

[Flaming_Telepath]

I know you think you're just soooooo cute with that response, but here's the burst to your bubble:

 

1. Having someone "on ignore" doesn't mean there can't be any interaction.

 

I wouldn't know. I've never felt threatened enough to use the ignore function. However, I'm sure that if I ever did, I'd be strong enough to actually, well, ignore that person.

 

2. I have never made a "I will never post to or about FT ever again" pronouncement, unlike ol' Gaz.

 

No, you haven't. You have, however, suggested that we go on our own merry little ways and avoid each other.

 

3. You feel no qualms about replying to and about me. I would be happy to never interact with you again, but that requires you do the same. Until and if you do, there's no such obligation to not interact with you.

 

When was the last time I even responded to you, never mind disgreed with you?

 

Today? Yesterday? Saturday? Last week?

 

I'll give you a clue...it's not even this month.

 

So although I'm clearly avoiding you, it doesn't stop you from your cute little jabs at me.

 

Your logic fails. Again.

 

I think not.

[mikenyc]

Someday, there will be a board that has a functional ignore. You put someone on ignore, they can't see anything you post either, either directly or quoted. That will be a very nice board for me.

 

You would be a one man wolfpack staring at a blank screen.

[RockMyAmadeus]

yet I have fallen foul of none of the eBay chat crowd?

 

 

 

Sorry to be the crick in your hitch.

 

 

Oh, come on. You'd fall out with your breakfast.

 

He's just pickin a fight. Par for the course.

 

 

"Par for the course"....

 

No, dear, setting the record straight. I don't "pick fights", though the eternally thin-skinned might think so.

 

As far as picking fights, how about this:

 

I will never post to or about RMA on these boards ever again.

 

You just can't keep your word, can you? I read your post to Cal, and wanted to respond, but, see, I'm a man of my word. If you don't post to/about me, I don't post to/about you.

 

But...you...just...can't...control...yourself.

 

 

But it didn't stop you from 'picking' on me in this thread.

 

Even though you (a) have me on ignore and (b) have declared that we should avoid each another.

 

But...you...just...can't...control...yourself.

 

 

But.... surely RMA ignores people that he puts on ignore? I'm sure he's posted such things before?

 

Ignore must be mutual, or it serves no purpose. And I don't mean the "ignore function."

 

Someday, there will be a board that has a functional ignore. You put someone on ignore, they can't see anything you post either, either directly or quoted. That will be a very nice board for me.

 

Well, just since I did say that you must have posted something along those lines before...

The ignore button is awesome.

 

It would be even more awesome if people who used it could abide by it and, ya know, leave people they are ignoring alone.

..... which does go against your being the first to rag on FT in this thread.

 

 

...except, of course, it has to go BOTH WAYS, as I said. Putting someone on ignore doesn't therefore give them carte blanch to say anything they wish about the party doing the ignoring. There is no "first", as if every thread is a brand new clean slate, and previous interaction is not to be considered. That is quite obviously absurd.

 

In reality, nearly every single thread on this board comes with more baggage than a Samsonite convention.

 

Your argument is the same one kids make: "He hit me first!" "Well, what did you do to make him want to hit you" "Nothing!"

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

Someday, there will be a board that has a functional ignore. You put someone on ignore, they can't see anything you post either, either directly or quoted. That will be a very nice board for me.

 

You would be a one man wolfpack staring at a blank screen.

 

Oh, look, Mikenyc's demonstrating his utter obsession with me again.

 

I'd be flattered if your stalking wasn't so damn creepy.

 

 

I know you believe what you have said, because you're irrational, and I know that some others believe it, too, but it's just not true, kiddo.

[gaz973]

yet I have fallen foul of none of the eBay chat crowd?

 

 

 

Sorry to be the crick in your hitch.

 

 

Oh, come on. You'd fall out with your breakfast.

 

He's just pickin a fight. Par for the course.

 

 

"Par for the course"....

 

No, dear, setting the record straight. I don't "pick fights", though the eternally thin-skinned might think so.

 

As far as picking fights, how about this:

 

I will never post to or about RMA on these boards ever again.

 

You just can't keep your word, can you? I read your post to Cal, and wanted to respond, but, see, I'm a man of my word. If you don't post to/about me, I don't post to/about you.

 

But...you...just...can't...control...yourself.

 

 

But it didn't stop you from 'picking' on me in this thread.

 

Even though you (a) have me on ignore and (b) have declared that we should avoid each another.

 

But...you...just...can't...control...yourself.

 

 

But.... surely RMA ignores people that he puts on ignore? I'm sure he's posted such things before?

 

Ignore must be mutual, or it serves no purpose. And I don't mean the "ignore function."

 

Someday, there will be a board that has a functional ignore. You put someone on ignore, they can't see anything you post either, either directly or quoted. That will be a very nice board for me.

 

Well, just since I did say that you must have posted something along those lines before...

The ignore button is awesome.

 

It would be even more awesome if people who used it could abide by it and, ya know, leave people they are ignoring alone.

..... which does go against your being the first to rag on FT in this thread.

 

 

...except, of course, it has to go BOTH WAYS, as I said. Putting someone on ignore doesn't therefore give them carte blanch to say anything they wish about the party doing the ignoring. There is no "first", as if every thread is a brand new clean slate, and previous interaction is not to be considered. That is quite obviously absurd.

 

In reality, nearly every single thread on this board comes with more baggage than a Samsonite convention.

 

Your argument is the same one kids make: "He hit me first!" "Well, what did you do to make him want to hit you" "Nothing!"

 

 

But FT says he hasn't responded to you in over a month and I doubt that he'd state that here if it were untrue so it was pretty much a ceasefire until you just quoted him, right? Also, I believe I recall you saying to FT that the two of you should just avoid each other so it seems to me that you're doing pretty much the same thing that you called me up on.

[gaz973]

...and now that I've brished my teeth, good night to all.

[RockMyAmadeus]

I know you think you're just soooooo cute with that response, but here's the burst to your bubble:

 

1. Having someone "on ignore" doesn't mean there can't be any interaction.

 

I wouldn't know. I've never felt threatened enough to use the ignore function. However, I'm sure that if I ever did, I'd be strong enough to actually, well, ignore that person.

 

 

 

Rrrrrrrrrright. Especially if they continued to "make cute little jabs" at you.

 

Oh, look! A unicorn!

 

2. I have never made a "I will never post to or about FT ever again" pronouncement, unlike ol' Gaz.

 

No, you haven't. You have, however, suggested that we go on our own merry little ways and avoid each other.

 

That's right....a suggestion you have consistently ignored. I'm still game...if you are.

 

3. You feel no qualms about replying to and about me. I would be happy to never interact with you again, but that requires you do the same. Until and if you do, there's no such obligation to not interact with you.

 

When was the last time I even responded to you, never mind disgreed with you?

 

Today? Yesterday? Saturday? Last week?

 

I'll give you a clue...it's not even this month.

 

So although I'm clearly avoiding you, it doesn't stop you from your cute little jabs at me.

 

Wow. Two WHOLE weeks.

 

Imagine that.

 

Of course, my comment wasn't a "cute little jab." It was a statement of fact, correcting your erroneous comment.

 

Your logic fails. Again.

 

I think not.

 

You're right. You don't think.