|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 295 OF 849 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Mar-31-12 | | Jim Bartle: In truth I think OSU lost it in the first half. They totally outclassed Kansas but somehow only led by 9 points. They should have been leading by 15 or more. That last second turnover at the end of the first half ended up being a killer. |
|
| Mar-31-12 | | PinnedPiece: OSU comes up short. Exciting game, though. Congrats Kansas, eh? Who's supposed to win, Kentucky or Kansas? I think I would put my chips on Kentucky. |
|
| Mar-31-12 | | Jim Bartle: Just like chess in the 80s. After all the preliminaries the K's end up fighting for the championship. |
|
Apr-01-12
 | | OhioChessFan: I think Kentucky would have killed OSU if they'd made it and will kill Kansas. |
|
| Apr-01-12 | | MarkFinan: Hi there <OCF>.. Just wandered if you fancied going over a game of mine with me, over at my forum? I don't like to keep imposing myself on Dom, especially as he's busy, and i don't want to keep asking <frogbert> for the same reason, plus he's kinda got other things going on right now.. I don't know what your rating is, but any help would be appreciated?? Its your call? |
|
| Apr-02-12 | | Bureaucrat: <OhioChessFan: <Bureaucrat: You have been calling me names and followed me around. I never bothered to reply. I owe you nothing, I never said one bad word about you, and I don't give a damn about what you say about anything.> This is sadly typical of you and your group. The point you were allegedly responding to was: <really? when you and rogge were talking about <annie k.> in that forum , was that not gossip?you want me to remind you the details of that gossip or some other gossips you guys indulge in?> And <qc> is exactly right in that. I will note that I am not exactly <qc> biggest fan, so there's no bff issues going on here. But you refused to address the point, since you know you are plainly wrong. Let me say this again. You are wrong. And again. You are wrong. You made a false statement, in less rarefied circles, they call those things "lies", but regardless, you made a claim that was demonstrably false. And you don't care so long as your back slapping buddies agree with you. The plain fact is you were gossipping about <Annie K.>> You ignored my questions about the above post of yours, so let me try again. Which claim did I make that is demonstrably false?
How is it demonstrably false?
You called me a liar in someone else's forum. Did you base that claim on any evidence whatsoever, apart from someone's paranoid interpretation of Google translate from memory? Or is that something you will accept as documentation of "plain facts"? Among other things, you said I am part of some "group" of people, with "back slapping buddies". Let me tell you this: I am not a part of any group, and I am sick and tired of being lumped together with other people in all sorts of stupid conspiracy theories. If I did something bad that is "typical" of <me>, then fine. Show me how it was bad and "typical", but leave others out of it. |
|
| Apr-02-12 | | quantum.conscious: in my opinion, you were exactly right <ocf>. see also my post in kibitzer's cafe.
i only want to complete this conversation thread and then i am going to take a long break from cg.com. and when i talk about group , i mean a certain number of people who behave in a typical fashion common to all persons of that group and they show friendliness towards each other. bureaucrat is definitely part of a certain group that way. |
|
| Apr-02-12 | | quantum.conscious: also see this post of rogge in rogge forum :
<rogge: Vel, om ikkke annet ble det grundig dokumentert hvilken nyttig idiot kvanteløken kan manipuleres til å være. > he is calling someone idiot and not naming anyone in particular. now, he will delete this post soon and the people of his group will say that they are called names indirectly. and that they don't gossip in that group and .... i would rather stay away from this dishonesty ,lack of integrity and argumentative trolling and would go on a long break soon. have a nice day , <ocf> |
|
Apr-02-12
| | OhioChessFan: <MF> I didn't see the game you meant in your forum. Monday is a busy day for me so it would be Tuesday at the earliest. |
|
Apr-02-12
| | OhioChessFan: <bureaucrat: You ignored my questions about the above post of yours, so let me try again. Which claim did I make that is demonstrably false? > What, you want me to recreate posts that have been deleted? |
|
| Apr-02-12 | | Bureaucrat: <What, you want me to recreate posts that have been deleted?> Did I say something that is demonstrably false or not? |
|
| Apr-02-12 | | Travis Bickle: Here's 1 of your Rockin' songs Mr Presley. ; P
http://youtu.be/VL5d0leKh0o |
|
| Apr-02-12 | | Bureaucrat: What shall it be, OCF? When you accuse someone of lying, and you are asked to justify that claim, you either 1) put up some sort of evidence to back it up, or
2) retract your accusation and apologise.
Or would you rather
3) get into your escape capsule and prepare for takeoff? Your first answer indicates that you prefer the third option, but you may still change your mind. I am waiting for your honest reply. |
|
Apr-02-12
| | OhioChessFan: <What, you want me to recreate posts that have been deleted?> <Bureaucrat: Did I say something that is demonstrably false or not?> Are you denying making disparaging remarks about Annie K. or not? |
|
| Apr-02-12 | | Bureaucrat: You accused me of lying, and instead of putting up any evidence, you try to interrogate me. Your allegations were wrong. Repeat: wrong. Is that clear enough? Now apologise, if you have any decency at all. |
|
| Apr-02-12 | | rogge: *I* called one of <Annie>'s posts at <Dom>'s pompous and pretentious. I did so in my own forum, in Norwegian. That's quite similar to how Annie comments on issues in *her* forum (she openly admits doing that). The difference is of course she writes it in English. Now, she's probably not too proud of her performance at <Dom>'s since she bought <MarkFinan> a premium membership. Leave <Bureaucrat> out of this. |
|
| Apr-02-12 | | quantum.conscious: < rogge: *I* called one of <Annie>'s posts at <Dom>'s pompous and pretentious. I did so in my own forum, in Norwegian. That's quite similar to how Annie comments on issues in *her* forum (she openly admits doing that). The difference is of course she writes it in English. Now, she's probably not too proud of her performance at <Dom>'s since she bought <MarkFinan> a premium membership.
Leave <Bureaucrat> out of this. > ocf, bureaucrat said there is no gossip in rogge forum and rogge gave proof here in your forum that bureaucrat was lying. (even if bureaucrat says about that lie that he did not participate in that gossip or was not aware of this gossip , it still does not make his lie a truth). it has been demonstrated clearly.
if bureaucrat has any decency , any honesty , any integrity, he will apologize. and promise that he will not lie in future. you were clearly right about what you were saying about bureaucrat and that was not even a gossip. rogge says his gossip turned out to be true (again an opinion which could or could not be true) . may be . but that is irrelevant. |
|
| Apr-02-12 | | quantum.conscious: and not only bureaucrat was aware of this gossip in rogge forum , he participated in that gossip with glee ,too. |
|
| Apr-02-12 | | MarkFinan: <quantum.concious> Give it a rest now please mate.. <OCF> My games still there, its the only one iv'e posted in my forum so far, its a game against shredder.. I only seem to write my games against shredder down because the rest go in FICS database, and some computer gives me all the evals etc.. But there's nothing like someone going through your games with you, and i don't know any chess players nowadays in my "real life".. Short of joining a club, which i really should do, this is the only place someone like me gets to talk chess! Anyway, iv'e done my "work" for today, so i'll be popping in and out through the night, so if you're still up for it when you have time?? |
|
Apr-03-12
 | | Annie K.: <rogge: <Now, she's probably not too proud of her performance at <Dom>'s since she bought <MarkFinan> a premium membership.>> <quantum.conscious: <rogge says his gossip turned out to be true (again an opinion which could or could not be true) . may be . but that is irrelevant.>> Eh, no, it's completely wrong, actually. If he doesn't understand the sequence, then he doesn't understand the sequence. Others do. :) <Ohio> I have a feeling you - and probably many other readers - may understand Tony's view a little better now. ;) Kinda funny, rilly, how their tactics tend to achieve that. |
|
| Apr-03-12 | | PinnedPiece: May I intervene? I have five points to make.
Point 1: This side is barking up a tree with very little bark. Point 2: The other side has squirrels sitting on their limbs, making chattering noises designed to distract. Point 3: The side that no one has represented yet contains a sack of bagworms that is ready to strip the tree bare http://www.ehow.com/about_4566213_b... Point 4: And of course there is my side, <the outside>, who can't figure out for the life of him what all the consternation, elevated blood pressure, curled lips, furrowed brows, clenched teeth, tightened pectorals, rasping voices, reaching behind the back for the hidden knives, darting eyes, beads of sweat above the upper lip, growls, convoluted explanations and apologies, absence of any "Fixer" offering a round of Miller Lights, misunderstandings piled on ugly misrepresentations under layers of back storied mistruths stacked on confusions, together with a cartload of he-saids she-saids and no horizon in sight on this rudderless ship.... ---
Point 5: What was I saying, anyway?
. |
|
| Apr-03-12 | | Colonel Mortimer: Point 6: When you have nothing to say, best not say anything at all. |
|
| Apr-03-12 | | PinnedPiece: <CM: Pt 6>
That's it! Thanks for reminding me!
I'll return the favor (pt 6) to you as frequently as I can! P.S. I'm honored that on your peek back in to see what's cooking, your first post is to me! . |
|
Apr-05-12
| | OhioChessFan: What I like about this song: I can't possibly be in a bad mood after listening to it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jvHK... |
|
Apr-06-12
 | | Penguincw: < OhioChessFan: While swimming, penguins will leap in shallow arcs above the surface of the water, a practice called porpoising. This coats their plumage with tiny bubbles that reduce friction, allowing them to swim as fast as 20 miles per hour (32 kph). It may also help them evade predators and allows them to breathe more regularly, and some scientists theorize that they may make these leaps out of sheer joy. > Thanks for the info. I just got interested in penguins recently, so this is new, plus I haven't read all of the book yet. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 295 OF 849 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
rreusser/...