Page 12 of 13
Re: No invisability
Posted: Sun May 15, 2011 10:29 am
by Kat
Pam wrote:Just hope those two new members aren't who I think they are, but I am 99% sure one of them is SCREAMMMMMM and one is a Nazimick imposter.
Come on Pam! I don't know who your suspects that you mention are, but the "perceptive" people here have already observed that the last entrant is an extreme makeover of "Style My House".
Re: No invisability
Posted: Sun May 15, 2011 11:32 am
by 1972
You just won't let it die will you Kim?
You seem to be the only person who just doesn't get it. On purpose I might add. I have no problems with how anyone lives their lives. I only have probles with doucheholefuckwadsdickbags that cause problems when . . .wait for it . . .THERE ARE NONE.
I call a spade a spade; you call a spade a fag apparently.
When a person insists on posting thread after thread of nothing but drunken escapades and retarded shit, I call them on it. how does this make me a homophobe again?
I love you and god bless.
Long life to you and yours.
Assgoblin.
Re: No invisability
Posted: Sun May 15, 2011 9:09 pm
by lkwalker
how does this make me a homophobe again?
You are betrayed by your vocabulary.
Re: No invisability
Posted: Mon May 16, 2011 1:08 pm
by 1972
lkwalker wrote:how does this make me a homophobe again?
You are betrayed by your vocabulary.
Re: No invisability
Posted: Mon May 16, 2011 1:37 pm
by lkwalker
Words have meaning that trivial Lexian emoticons do not.
Re: No invisability
Posted: Mon May 16, 2011 2:30 pm
by 1972
lkwalker wrote:Walker is trivial.
fixt
Re: No invisability
Posted: Mon May 16, 2011 3:08 pm
by lkwalker
No- Walker is not trivial. But feel free to hold to that premise if you must. It's comforting, no?
Re: No invisability
Posted: Mon May 16, 2011 5:45 pm
by TraumaT
lkwalker wrote:Words have meaning that trivial Lexian emoticons do not.
Must not... post... wall of.... emoticons.
Re: No invisability
Posted: Tue May 17, 2011 3:09 am
by Dr Exile
Re: No invisability
Posted: Tue May 17, 2011 3:10 am
by Dr Exile
