Callmesick and RD challenging the ban hammer

[HappyHappy]

I figured it out.
They can not handle getting
trashed on this board every time they post
so they are trying their best to
commit ACWOS suicide!!!!!
The ruse will not work, we know that they are
weak propagandists.


HH

[Reservoir_Dog]

[callmeslick]

I'd like HH to find one example, ONE.....in which I came close to doing ANYTHING that would instigate a ban. Like, for instance, sending obscene PMs to people?

[Pudfark]

I'd like HH to find one example, ONE.....in which I came close to doing ANYTHING that would instigate a ban. Like, for instance, sending obscene PMs to people?

Just HH...?

[callmeslick]

feel free, Pud. I find it a tad more hypocritical for HH to make the statement, but do YOU feel I've ever pushed that envelope of the CWOS rulebook?

[Pudfark]

I could give you an answer that is non-definitive, like you frequently do.

However, I ain't that kind of person.

In short, not that I'm aware of and I have a pretty good memory.
Though, I will add this for free....if there is such a thing as guilt by
association? You're entitled to a jury trial.

[callmeslick]

I could give you an answer that is non-definitive, like you frequently do.

However, I ain't that kind of person.

In short, not that I'm aware of and I have a pretty good memory.
Though, I will add this for free....if there is such a thing as guilt by
association? You're entitled to a jury trial.

you really want to go to 'guilt by association'?? Really?

[Pudfark]

Perhaps, you missed the "qualifier"...
"If there is such a thing"

[callmeslick]

as I thought.......

[Pudfark]

Glad yer on the page, now.

You ready for your "Miranda"?


In R_D's "case"...."Miranda" don't apply.
What he will need is a "wife beater, cotton thong and some hadji lotion".