The Pop Culture Information Society...
These are the messages that have been posted on inthe00s over the past few years.
Check out the messageboard archive index for a complete list of topic areas.
This archive is periodically refreshed with the latest messages from the current messageboard.
Check for new replies or respond here...
Subject: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/02/13 at 10:04 pm
I can hardly believe that I am replying to this thread, but I want to share what 2004 was like for me...
My husband deployed to Irag for his 1st tour of duty.
There's me, at home, with my 12 year old son.
My little spot on the earth, was not sunshine and happiness.
My little spot consisted of watching the news, barely sleeping and taking care of EVERYTHING while my husband was away.
Your happy feeling was because my husband had your back... and still does.
I only said that WHERE I LIVED, there was a happy atmosphere. I know that there are veterans who are performing a task that's not only dangerous but perhaps even underappreciated,
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Tam on 09/02/13 at 10:11 pm
I only said that WHERE I LIVED, there was a happy atmosphere. I know that there are veterans who are performing a task that's not only dangerous but perhaps even underappreciated,
Whoa! A little bit touchy aren't we?
You will notice of course that I didn't single ONLY you out in my comment.
As for your reply - I said and I quote:
My little spot on the earth, was not sunshine and happiness.
which doesn't read that EVERYWHERE was the same way.
Geesh.
"The lady doth protest too much, methinks." Hamlet ~ Shakespeare
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/02/13 at 10:15 pm
Whoa! A little bit touchy aren't we?
You will notice of course that I didn't single ONLY you out in my comment.
As for your reply - I said and I quote:
which doesn't read that EVERYWHERE was the same way.
Geesh.
"The lady doth protest too much, methinks." Hamlet ~ Shakespeare
I know you pointed out other comments and you didn't say everywhere was unhappy, but how is it touchy to say that veterans are doing a task that many take for granted? It can't be easy out there.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Tam on 09/02/13 at 10:22 pm
I know you pointed out other comments and you didn't say everywhere was unhappy, but how is it touchy to say that veterans are doing a task that many take for granted?
*face palm*
I quoted your entire post.
You specifically screamed "I only said WHERE I LIVED, there was a happy atmosphere..."
You said that, not me.
Touchy is because you think I singled you out in your reply and it wasn't until after I pointed out that I didn't, and said you were touchy, you are trying to figure a different way to try and get me riled. Not gonna happen.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/02/13 at 10:25 pm
, you are trying to figure a different way to try and get me riled. Not gonna happen.
Not at all, I just wanted to say that I think about the people risking a lot to fight for their peers. In 2004, and in other years.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Tam on 09/02/13 at 10:30 pm
Not at all, I just wanted to say that I think about the people risking a lot to fight for their peers. In 2004, and in other years.
Well then you should have just said that and left the melodrama out of it.
That's the problem with a lot of the younger generation, they think they have a lot to say and proceed to say it, before actually hearing what they are saying.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/02/13 at 10:34 pm
Well then you should have just said that and left the melodrama out of it.
That's the problem with a lot of the younger generation, they think they have a lot to say and proceed to say it, before actually hearing what they are saying.
What "melodrama"? The "screaming"? I typed in captial letters "where I lived" to highlight empathy for those who may not have had such a good 2004. I'll admit I could've bolded instead of used capital letters. I'd say I'm older than some of the people here.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: XYkid on 09/02/13 at 10:35 pm
I agree. Despite 9/11 and the Iraq invasion in recent events, the atmosphere where I lived was rather positive, including the pop culture.
2004 did seem like a feel good year, and not just because I was 10 at the time.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Tam on 09/02/13 at 10:41 pm
What "melodrama"? The "screaming"? I typed in captial letters "where I lived" to highlight empathy for those who may not have had such a good 2004. I'd say I'm older than some of the people here.
The melodrama was your jump on my reply to defend yourself... when shots were never fired.
Ahh...
So capital letters no longer means screaming, it means empathy now. I will have to remember that the next time I give my condolences to or share in sadness with a friend. ::)
Good for you on being older than some of the people on here! w00t!
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/02/13 at 10:42 pm
The melodrama was your jump on my reply to defend yourself... when shots were never fired.
Ahh...
So capital letters no longer means screaming, it means empathy now. I will have to remember that the next time I give my condolences to or share in sadness with a friend. ::)
Good for you on being older than some of the people on here! w00t!
I admit I could've bolded or something. I said I'm older because you seemed to assume that I was part of the "younger generation".
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Tam on 09/02/13 at 10:47 pm
I admit I could've bolded or something. I said I'm older because you seemed to assume that I was part of the "younger generation".
Erm... I didn't specifically say you did I?
Well then you should have just said that and left the melodrama out of it.
That's the problem with a lot of the younger generation, they think they have a lot to say and proceed to say it, before actually hearing what they are saying.
Nope. I said "a lot of the younger generation" but didn't say Love Triangle anywhere in there...
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/02/13 at 10:50 pm
Erm... I didn't specifically say you did I?
Nope. I said "a lot of the younger generation" but didn't say Love Triangle anywhere in there...
Look, I'm not trying to "fire shots" at you. I just wanted to give the veterans an honorable nod, so to speak. That's it.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: snozberries on 09/02/13 at 10:54 pm
I was quite fond of 2004. I watched The Apprentice with Donald Trump around that time.
Wow. You know Donald trump?
What was it like watching his show with him?
Did he like how he came across? Was he sensitive about his hair?
Did you guys talk about the birther movement that would come a couple yrs later?
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/02/13 at 10:57 pm
Wow. You know Donald trump?
What was it like watching his show with him?
Did he like how he came across? Was he sensitive about his hair?
Did you guys talk about the birther movement that would come a couple yrs later?
When I say I watched The Apprentice "with Donald Trump", I am referring to the fact that I watched the Donald Trump-hosted version.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: snozberries on 09/02/13 at 11:00 pm
I can hardly believe that I am replying to this thread, but I want to share what 2004 was like for me...
My husband deployed to Irag for his 1st tour of duty.
There's me, at home, with my 12 year old son.
My little spot on the earth, was not sunshine and happiness.
My little spot consisted of watching the news, barely sleeping and taking care of EVERYTHING while my husband was away.
Your happy feeling was because my husband had your back... and still does.
With apologies to 80s kid cuz he's the only worthy one in The bunch.
They were kids in 04. Too young, stupid and nia e to care about what was going in in the real world. It was simpler then cuz they didn't care about anything but themselves. Just like us when we were 14-16.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Tam on 09/02/13 at 11:03 pm
Look, I'm not trying to "fire shots" at you. I just wanted to give the veterans an honorable nod, so to speak. That's it.
And by the same token, all I was doing was sharing what 2004 was like for me, then you screamed at me and showed that you didn't comprehend a single thing I said.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Tam on 09/02/13 at 11:04 pm
With apologies to 80s kid cuz he's the only worthy one in The bunch.
They were kids in 04. Too young, stupid and nia e to care about what was going in in the real world. It was simpler then cuz they didn't care about anything but themselves. Just like us when we were 14-16.
This.
I approve this message.
LOL
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: snozberries on 09/02/13 at 11:05 pm
Not at all, I just wanted to say that I think about the people risking a lot to fight for their peers. In 2004, and in other years.
I don't think you thought about it at all til tam brought it up.
You said where you lived it was happy but I'm guessing it was happy for you not everyone in your region. There were lots of people in your area dealing with the same stuff tam dealt with you were just oblivious to it because you were a teenager and unable to see beyond your universe. Has your father, brother, mother or sister been deployed you would've had a different experience.
Be happy you were happy and hey.... Why not send a thank you to her husband for keeping us safe
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/02/13 at 11:05 pm
With apologies to 80s kid cuz he's the only worthy one in The bunch.
They were kids in 04. Too young, stupid and nia e to care about what was going in in the real world. It was simpler then cuz they didn't care about anything but themselves. Just like us when we were 14-16.
Hopefully, you're not including me in that. Because I wasn't a kid in 2004.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/02/13 at 11:06 pm
I don't think you thought about it at all til tam brought it up.
You said where you lived it was happy but I'm guessing it was happy for you not everyone in your region. There were lots of people in your area dealing with the same stuff tam dealt with you were just oblivious to it because you were a teenager and unable to see beyond your universe. Has your father, brother, mother or sister been deployed you would've had a different experience.
Be happy you were happy and hey.... Why not send a thank you to her husband for keeping us safe
Except I wasn't a kid or teenager in 2004...
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: snozberries on 09/02/13 at 11:06 pm
That's the problem with a lot of the younger generation, they think they have a lot to say and proceed to say it, before actually hearing what they are saying.
This gets you karma.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/02/13 at 11:06 pm
And by the same token, all I was doing was sharing what 2004 was like for me, then you screamed at me and showed that you didn't comprehend a single thing I said.
I admit for the third time that I could've bolded.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: snozberries on 09/02/13 at 11:09 pm
The melodrama was your jump on my reply to defend yourself... when shots were never fired.
Ahh...
So capital letters no longer means screaming, it means empathy now. I will have to remember that the next time I give my condolences to or share in sadness with a friend. ::)
Good for you on being older than some of the people on here! w00t!
I CAN'T GIVE YOU ANOYHER KATMA SO I'M TYPING THIS POST TO SHOW MY EMPATHY FOR THE WORDS YOU JUST WROTE!!!!
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Tam on 09/02/13 at 11:10 pm
This gets you karma.
Is it just me?
Every time I read the word karma, I hear Hot Butter's Popcorn!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBYjZTdrJlA
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: snozberries on 09/02/13 at 11:10 pm
I admit I could've bolded or something. I said I'm older because you seemed to assume that I was part of the "younger generation".
You were younger then... You were talking about then
Your profile says you're 25. From where I sit you're still a kid.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/02/13 at 11:11 pm
You were younger then... You were talking about then
Your profile says you're 25. From where I sit you're still a kid.
Then my profile is inaccurate.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: snozberries on 09/02/13 at 11:12 pm
When I say I watched The Apprentice "with Donald Trump", I am referring to the fact that I watched the Donald Trump-hosted version.
Oh so you watched a show Donald Trump was on....why didn't you just say that?
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: snozberries on 09/02/13 at 11:12 pm
This.
I approve this message.
LOL
O0
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: whistledog on 09/02/13 at 11:12 pm
Hopefully, you're not including me in that. Because I wasn't a kid in 2004.
Except I wasn't a kid or teenager in 2004...
I was the first man launched in space, and I the inventor of the wheel.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: snozberries on 09/02/13 at 11:13 pm
Hopefully, you're not including me in that. Because I wasn't a kid in 2004.
I was... And you were.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: snozberries on 09/02/13 at 11:14 pm
Except I wasn't a kid or teenager in 2004...
Well you were still self absorbed and immature.
And you still are.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/02/13 at 11:14 pm
I was... And you were.
I'm not 25. If my profile says that, it may be worth fixing.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/02/13 at 11:15 pm
Well you were still self absorbed and immature.
And you still are.
You barely know me, if at all.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: snozberries on 09/02/13 at 11:16 pm
Is it just me?
Every time I read the word karma, I hear Hot Butter's Popcorn!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBYjZTdrJlA
Mmm goes great with culture club must... I'm singing one of their songs right now. Guess which one?
It's from the 80s ;D
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: whistledog on 09/02/13 at 11:16 pm
I'm not 25.
Of course not. You have a ways to go until you hit that age.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: snozberries on 09/02/13 at 11:17 pm
Then my profile is inaccurate.
Naw I just remembered it wrong.... Or you went and changed it from 25 to 30....
Doesn't really matter my assessment still stands.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/02/13 at 11:18 pm
Of course not. You have a ways to go until you hit that age.
I'm older than 25. Just saying...
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: snozberries on 09/02/13 at 11:18 pm
I was the first man launched in space, and I the inventor of the wheel.
I am the genius that Steve jobs got all his ideas from. In my mind I am a billionaire.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Tam on 09/02/13 at 11:18 pm
Mmm goes great with culture club must... I'm singing one of their songs right now. Guess which one?
It's from the 80s ;D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmcA9LIIXWw
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: snozberries on 09/02/13 at 11:20 pm
You barely know me, if at all.
I know all I want to know. All you've done tonight is stir up arguments. If you can't handle it maybe you should go play in some other sandbox.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/02/13 at 11:23 pm
I know all I want to know. All you've done tonight is stir up arguments. If you can't handle it maybe you should go play in some other sandbox.
Tonight, I've given an honorable nod to veterans and pointing out a decadeology post. I admit that I could've reported the post to a moderator sooner and I accept responsibility for the closure of that thread. I won't however admit to intentionally "stir up arguments". I came here to discuss pop culture with people, not have shots fired.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: snozberries on 09/02/13 at 11:23 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmcA9LIIXWw
That's the one.
I particularly like the point line that says you come and go... You come and go-ooo-ooo-o ::)
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Tam on 09/02/13 at 11:24 pm
Be happy you were happy and hey.... Why not send a thank you to her husband for keeping us safe
snozberries, while I appreciate the sentiment, it was never my intent. Not looking for a thank you for the life and love that I have. And of course I would do it all again without changing a thing.
And receiving a thank you from one by way of another - not my style anyway.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: snozberries on 09/02/13 at 11:24 pm
Tonight, I've given an honorable nod to veterans and pointing out a decadeology post. I admit that I could've reported the post to a moderator sooner and I accept responsibility for the closure of that thread. I won't however admit to intentionally "stir up arguments". I came here to discuss pop culture with people, not have shots fired.
I haven't seen you discuss pop culture yet (well except fir that but about you watching tv with Donald trump....which was a lie anyway) I've jut keep seeing you argue with mods.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: whistledog on 09/02/13 at 11:25 pm
I'm older than 25. Just saying...
Still remains to be seen. Someone over 25 wouldn't start up arguments, and then complain like a little baby
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: snozberries on 09/02/13 at 11:26 pm
snozberries, while I appreciate the sentiment, it was never my intent. Not looking for a thank you for the life and love that I have. And of course I would do it all again without changing a thing.
And receiving a thank you from one by way of another - not my style anyway.
I know it's not what you ere looking for. It just would've been a more honorar reaction instead of arguing with you right off the bat.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/02/13 at 11:27 pm
I haven't seen you discuss pop culture yet I've jut keep seeing you argue with mods.
One example: I mentioned The Apprentice (tv show)
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Tam on 09/02/13 at 11:27 pm
Tonight, I've given an honorable nod to veterans and pointing out a decadeology post. I admit that I could've reported the post to a moderator sooner and I accept responsibility for the closure of that thread. I won't however admit to intentionally "stir up arguments". I came here to discuss pop culture with people, not have shots fired.
Here is my last question to you:
In all honesty, you joined last night correct?
So in 24 hrs, you have come to grasp exactly what the term decadeology means, how to recognize it and went one step further and reported it. Is this all correct?
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: snozberries on 09/02/13 at 11:29 pm
One example: I mentioned The Apprentice (tv show)
Ihad actually just edited my post to reflect that... But again it was misleading since you implied watching that show with Donald Trump.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/02/13 at 11:29 pm
I know it's not what you ere looking for. It just would've been a more honorar reaction instead of arguing with you right off the bat.
I had no intention of "arguing".
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/02/13 at 11:30 pm
Here is my last question to you:
In all honesty, you joined last night correct?
So in 24 hrs, you have come to grasp exactly what the term decadeology means, how to recognize it and went one step further and reported it. Is this all correct?
If I have the right idea about what decadeology is, then that's correct.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: snozberries on 09/02/13 at 11:30 pm
I had no intention of "arguing".
You sure are doing a good job of it anyway.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/02/13 at 11:32 pm
Ihad actually just edited my post to reflect that... But again it was misleading since you implied watching that show with Donald Trump.
It could've been misleading, although that would be quite a claim to say that I actually watched the show while sitting next to Trump himself.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/02/13 at 11:32 pm
You sure are doing a good job of it anyway.
I'm merely replying to posts right now.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: whistledog on 09/02/13 at 11:36 pm
I'm merely replying to posts right now.
What is the point of that now? With the commotion you've caused in the brief time you've been here, I wouldn't hold my breath on making any friends around here :-\\
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: snozberries on 09/02/13 at 11:37 pm
It could've been misleading, although that would be quite a claim to say that I actually watched the show while sitting next to Trump himself.
I watched the Butler with Oprah. She wasn't sitting next to me but we were in the same room.
I watch many things with many celebs. The way you write it was misleading. Try using punctuation or just stating your posts more clearly.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/02/13 at 11:38 pm
What is the point of that now? With the commotion you've caused in the brief time you've been here, I wouldn't hold my breath on making any friends around here :-\\
The decadeology situation - I admit that I could've just reported to a moderator sooner. That said, I still believed it was decadeology.
This thread - I intended to praise the veterans and for no commotions to arise.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: snozberries on 09/02/13 at 11:38 pm
What is the point of that now? With the commotion you've caused in the brief time you've been here, I wouldn't hold my breath on making any friends around here :-\\
Any attention, even negative attention, is still attention.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Tam on 09/02/13 at 11:39 pm
If I have the right idea about what decadeology is, then that's correct.
Well, here is the thing:
We have had a number of accounts created, all being this person or that person, and in all, what they do is come into threads, create havoc, spread hate etc.
Your joining and already having the knowledge of decadeology makes you suspect.
More-so, since I can see your IP and know exactly what kind of server you are using and where the server is from.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: snozberries on 09/02/13 at 11:43 pm
The decadeology situation - I admit that I could've just reported to a moderator sooner. That said, I still believed it was decadeology.
This thread - I intended to praise the veterans and for no commotions to arise.
I see no evidence of your intentions of praising veterans
Lets look at your post again?
I agree. Despite 9/11 and the Iraq invasion in recent events, the atmosphere where I lived was rather positive, including the pop culture.
Yep...zero mention of veterans. In fact you say "despite" (the climate of post) 9/11 & the war.....
Where in that statement do you praise vets, soldiers or their families???
Oh wait.... You don't.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/02/13 at 11:43 pm
Well, here is the thing:
We have had a number of accounts created, all being this person or that person, and in all, what they do is come into threads, create havoc, spread hate etc.
Your joining and already having the knowledge of decadeology makes you suspect.
More-so, since I can see your IP and know exactly what kind of server you are using and where the server is from.
If you thought I was someone trying to cause trouble, then I guess it's understandable why I've faced "friction" on here.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/02/13 at 11:45 pm
I see no evidence of your intentions of praising veterans
Lets look at your post again?
Yep...zero mention of veterans. In fact you say "despite" (the climate of post) 9/11 & the war.....
Where in that statement do you praise vets, soldiers or their families???
Oh wait.... You don't.
It came in a later post...
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: snozberries on 09/02/13 at 11:46 pm
If you thought I was someone trying to cause trouble, then I guess it's understandable why I've faced "friction" on here.
I will say do have impeccable timing, a spot on posting style and a knack for pushing buttons.
Wanna not continue down this road? Learn to back off and stop looking for a fight.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/02/13 at 11:47 pm
I will say do have impeccable timing, a spot on posting style and a knack for pushing buttons.
Wanna not continue down this road? Learn to back off and stop looking for a fight.
I'm not trying to "look for a fight" and never was...
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: snozberries on 09/02/13 at 11:51 pm
It came in a later post...
After it was pointed out to you you talked about your intent.
This thread - I intended to praise the veterans and for no commotions to arise.
Again you made it sound you initially started posting with the intention of praising vets.
This is like the Donald trump thing. Say what you mean and mean what you say.
Perhaps if you worded your posts in a more direct manner these misinterpretations wouldn't continue to happen. I can only interpret the words as you write them....not how you meant to write them. ::)
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/02/13 at 11:52 pm
After it was pointed out to you you talked about your intent.
Again you made it sound you initially started posting with the intention of praising vets.
This is like the Donald trump thing. Say what you mean and mean what you say.
Perhaps if you worded your posts in a more direct manner these misinterpretations wouldn't continue to happen. I can only interpret the words as you write them....not how you meant to write them. ::)
You do have a point. But I don't mind clarifying for people who ask.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Tam on 09/02/13 at 11:58 pm
If you thought I was someone trying to cause trouble, then I guess it's understandable why I've faced "friction" on here.
It is a sad thing, that we have to keep our guards up and feel out new members because we have been spammed so badly in the past. In the last couple of days as a matter of fact.
Some of us do not trust as easily as others might. Some of us are not so easily fooled. Some of us are downright tired of ignorant guests/members and so some of us try to weed them out before they get too far in.
I will apologize for the thread getting out of control, but I can't apologize for being suspicious.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/03/13 at 12:00 am
It is a sad thing, that we have to keep our guards up and feel out new members because we have been spammed so badly in the past. In the last couple of days as a matter of fact.
Some of us do not trust as easily as others might. Some of us are not so easily fooled. Some of us are downright tired of ignorant guests/members and so some of us try to weed them out before they get too far in.
I will apologize for the thread getting out of control, but I can't apologize for being suspicious.
That's okay. Sometimes you have to have "defences". It's life.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: warped on 09/03/13 at 12:01 am
I split sometimes during ten-pin bowling (I bowled a lot around 2004) and I cleaned up with soap in the shower.
Did you do that with your grandma Walton blow up doll?
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/03/13 at 12:04 am
Did you do that with your grandma Walton blow up doll?
no
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: warped on 09/03/13 at 12:06 am
no
John Avery blow up doll?
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/03/13 at 12:07 am
John Avery blow up doll?
I have no blow up dolls. No Bob Johnson blow up doll. No Diana Williams blow up doll either.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: warped on 09/03/13 at 12:13 am
That's okay. Sometimes you have to have "defences". It's life.
Like defenses for a 1994 soccer team? Oh you probably don't remember that far back, I think you're still just a kid.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/03/13 at 12:17 am
Like defenses for a 1994 soccer team? Oh you probably don't remember that far back, I think you're still just a kid.
Actually, I can remember the 80s.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Inertia on 09/03/13 at 12:18 am
I have no blow up dolls. No Bob Johnson blow up doll. No Diana Williams blow up doll either.
Date Registered: September 01, 2013, 08:35:50 PM
Posts: 49 (49 per day)
Zealous aren't we? o.o
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: warped on 09/03/13 at 12:18 am
Actually, I can remember the 80s.
Can you remember 1982?
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/03/13 at 12:19 am
Date Registered: September 01, 2013, 08:35:50 PM
Posts: 49 (49 per day)
Zealous aren't we? o.o
Maybe.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/03/13 at 12:21 am
Can you remember 1982?
Yes. My earliest memory is from 1979.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: 80sfan on 09/03/13 at 12:22 am
Can you remember 1982?
Wasn't that the year the cold war started??
Wink, wink :. Of course not. ;)
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: warped on 09/03/13 at 12:23 am
Yes. My earliest memory is from 1979.
You must be born in 1973 or 1974
Still makes you a kid compared to me ;)
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/03/13 at 12:23 am
You must be born in 1973 or 1974
Still makes you a kid compared to me ;)
That's fine. At least I'm older than a few people here ;)
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: warped on 09/03/13 at 12:25 am
That's fine. At least I'm older than a few people here ;)
It could be, kid.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/03/13 at 12:26 am
It could be, kid.
:)
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: warped on 09/03/13 at 12:28 am
So your profile said you were 25 but remember 1979. That`s pretty good. Not too many have memories when they are -9
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/03/13 at 12:29 am
So your profile said you were 25 but remember 1979. That`s pretty good. Not too many have memories when they are -9
I guess I should correct my profile.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: warped on 09/03/13 at 12:30 am
I guess I should correct my profile.
So, then you admit you made another mistake.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/03/13 at 12:33 am
So, then you admit you made another mistake.
I didn't know that I had a "profile". But if I entered something wrong, then maybe I did make a mistake. Please forgive me, I'm still learning the ropes around here.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: warped on 09/03/13 at 12:36 am
I didn't know that I had a "profile". But if I entered something wrong, then maybe I did make a mistake. Please forgive me, I'm still learning the ropes around here.
You missed the proflie, but yet you read up all on decadeology and complained about it on your 4th post. ::)
I`m still wondering which banned member you are that`s returning.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/03/13 at 12:37 am
You missed the proflie, but yet you read up all on decadeology and complained about it on your 4th post. ::)
I`m still wondering which banned member you are that`s returning.
I'm not "returning", I'm new. I read decadeology because I saw "please read" in bold letters.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: warped on 09/03/13 at 12:47 am
I'm not "returning", I'm new. I read decadeology because I saw "please read" in bold letters.
Not buying that for a minute. As soon as you joined, you looked at my profile, whistledogs, snozberries a topic that had just been closed because 2 "new" members sabotaged it and they were banned.
Not buying it at all.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: snozberries on 09/03/13 at 12:48 am
That's okay. Sometimes you have to have "defences". It's life.
I have 'de' fences around my yard...
On the board I use my defenses. I tried de fences from my yard but I had a hard time keeping them in place here :D
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/03/13 at 12:49 am
Not buying that for a minute. As soon as you joined, you looked at my profile, whistledogs, snozberries a topic that had just been closed because 2 "new" members sabotaged it and they were banned.
Not buying it at all.
What?
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: snozberries on 09/03/13 at 12:49 am
Did you do that with your grandma Walton blow up doll?
I'm that's more 74 than 04
The kid probably doesn't even know what a grandma Walton is.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: snozberries on 09/03/13 at 12:50 am
I have no blow up dolls. No Bob Johnson blow up doll. No Diana Williams blow up doll either.
I don't know them...are they famous?
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: warped on 09/03/13 at 12:50 am
I'm that's more 74 than 04
The kid probably doesn't even know what a grandma Walton is.
kids his age dont. True.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: snozberries on 09/03/13 at 12:51 am
Yes. My earliest memory is from 1979.
Do remember the 21st night of September?
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/03/13 at 12:52 am
kids his age dont. True.
so 39 is too young to know those blow up dolls?
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: warped on 09/03/13 at 12:52 am
I don't know them...are they famous?
They were famous when Caroline rae met Underwater Jeff at the edge.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/03/13 at 12:52 am
Do remember the 21st night of September?
Better. I remember the 3rd night of July.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: warped on 09/03/13 at 12:53 am
so 39 is too young to know those blow up dolls?
wow, I thought you might be older than that. You are still a kid.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/03/13 at 12:54 am
wow, I thought you might be older than that. You are still a kid.
I'm nearly 40. Just one more year to go.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: warped on 09/03/13 at 12:55 am
What?
Not buying that for a minute. As soon as you joined Sunday, you looked at my profile, whistledogs, snozberries a topic that had just been closed because 2 "new" members sabotaged it and they were banned.
Not buying it at all.
(speaks louder)
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/03/13 at 12:58 am
Not buying that for a minute. As soon as you joined Sunday, you looked at my profile, whistledogs, snozberries a topic that had just been closed because 2 "new" members sabotaged it and they were banned.
Not buying it at all.
(speaks louder)
Why do you call a 39 year old a kid? Is 40 a kid too?
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: warped on 09/03/13 at 12:59 am
Why do you call a 39 year old a kid? Is 40 a kid too?
Now you are whining like a kid.
Therefore: Still a kid.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/03/13 at 1:00 am
Now you are whining like a kid.
Therefore: Still a kid.
I'm not whining, I'm asking
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: warped on 09/03/13 at 1:01 am
I'm not whining, I'm asking
An adult would know the answer to that question without asking it. Guess you aren't there yet.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/03/13 at 1:02 am
An adult would know the answer to that question without asking it. Guess you aren;t there yet.
Before coming here, I considered myself an adult because I am 39 and remember 1979.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: snozberries on 09/03/13 at 1:02 am
Not buying that for a minute. As soon as you joined Sunday, you looked at my profile, whistledogs, snozberries a topic that had just been closed because 2 "new" members sabotaged it and they were banned.
Not buying it at all.
(speaks louder)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g2Q0cyJSs04
;D
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: snozberries on 09/03/13 at 1:05 am
Why do you call a 39 year old a kid? Is 40 a kid too?
depends on how they act...
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: snozberries on 09/03/13 at 1:05 am
Before coming here, I considered myself an adult because I am 39 and remember 1979.
so you don't think of yourself as an adult any longer?
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/03/13 at 1:06 am
so you don't think of yourself as an adult any longer?
I am 39, nearly 40.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: warped on 09/03/13 at 1:08 am
Before coming here, I considered myself an adult because I am 39 and remember 1979.
What is so important about remembering 1979?
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: snozberries on 09/03/13 at 1:09 am
I am 39, nearly 40.
that wasn't my question.
you said before coming here you thought of yourself as an adult... that suggests that since coming here you no longer think of yourself in this way
I thought you were going to start using clearer, and more direct, language?
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/03/13 at 1:09 am
What is so important about remembering 1979?
It demonstrates age to be able to remember 34 years ago.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/03/13 at 1:10 am
that wasn't my question.
you said before coming here you thought of yourself as an adult... that suggests that since coming here you no longer think of yourself in this way
I thought you were going to start using clearer, and more direct, language?
I'm not sure how else to answer.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: warped on 09/03/13 at 1:10 am
It demonstrates age to be able to remember 34 years ago.
Why is that important...
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/03/13 at 1:11 am
Why is that important...
Because how can you be a kid if you can remember that far back in time?
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: snozberries on 09/03/13 at 1:12 am
It demonstrates age to be able to remember 34 years ago.
We aren't talking age we are talking maturity.
As in you come across about as mature as a 16 year old
And equally articulate.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: snozberries on 09/03/13 at 1:12 am
Because how can you be a kid if you can remember that far back in time?
Kid is a term I reserve for those younger, and less mature, than I am.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: warped on 09/03/13 at 1:13 am
Because how can you be a kid if you can remember that far back in time?
Why do you think you're a kid?
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/03/13 at 1:14 am
We aren't talking age we are talking maturity.
As in you come across about as mature as a 16 year old
And equally articulate.
I almost feel like I have to "walk on eggshells" (to use a figurative expression) just to "fit in" here. It makes me feel uneasy when I post to have this "social friction" applied to me.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: warped on 09/03/13 at 1:15 am
I almost feel like I have to "walk on eggshells" (to use a figurative expression) just to "fit in" here. It makes me feel uneasy when I post to have this "social friction" applied to me.
Do you have difficulty "fitting in" in places?
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: snozberries on 09/03/13 at 1:15 am
I almost feel like I have to "walk on eggshells" (to use a figurative expression) just to "fit in" here. It makes me feel uneasy when I post to have this "social friction" applied to me.
I'm just calling it how I see it.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/03/13 at 1:16 am
Do you have difficulty "fitting in" in places?
Not in general, but here it feels like I am under some kind of "close watch". All for being new.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: warped on 09/03/13 at 1:17 am
Not in general, but here it feels like I am under some kind of "close watch". All for being new.
And I say this again
Not buying that for a minute that you are new. As soon as you joined Sunday, you looked at my profile, whistledogs, snozberries a topic that had just been closed because 2 "new" members sabotaged it and they were banned.
Not buying it at all.
(speaks even louder)
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/03/13 at 1:18 am
And I say this again
Not buying that for a minute that you are new. As soon as you joined Sunday, you looked at my profile, whistledogs, snozberries a topic that had just been closed because 2 "new" members sabotaged it and they were banned.
Not buying it at all.
(speaks even louder)
I didn't ask you to pay money for my posts.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: warped on 09/03/13 at 1:20 am
I didn't ask you to pay money for my posts.
I thought snozberries asked you to start using clearer, and more direct, language.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/03/13 at 1:22 am
I thought snozberries asked you to start using clearer, and more direct, language.
You said you "weren't buying" it. I didn't ask you to pay money. How much clearer can I get?
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: warped on 09/03/13 at 1:24 am
You said you "weren't buying" it. I didn't ask you to pay money. How much clearer can I get?
I'm not buying that either.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/03/13 at 1:25 am
I'm not buying that either.
Why do I feel like I'm being bullied?
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: warped on 09/03/13 at 1:28 am
Why do I feel like I'm being bullied?
Why do I feel like you have been lying all along?
And I say this again
As soon as you joined Sunday, you looked at my profile, whistledogs, snozberries, and a topic that had just been closed because 2 "new" members sabotaged it and they were banned.
After your 4th post, you complained about something being decadeology (when it wasn't) and even reported the post afterwards. How can a new member know about the difficulties we have had with decadeology?
Now you just keep arguing with so many moderators this evening.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Love Triangle on 09/03/13 at 1:32 am
Why do I feel like you have been lying all along?
And I say this again
As soon as you joined Sunday, you looked at my profile, whistledogs, snozberries, and a topic that had just been closed because 2 "new" members sabotaged it and they were banned.
After your 4th post, you complained about something being decadeology (when it wasn't) and even reported the post afterwards. How can a new member know about the difficulties we have had with decadeology?
Now you just keep arguing with so many moderators this evening.
I guess the paranoia has been strong this evening.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Howard on 09/03/13 at 6:43 am
Can you remember 1982?
I can.
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Howard on 09/03/13 at 6:46 am
I have 'de' fences around my yard...
On the board I use my defenses. I tried de fences from my yard but I had a hard time keeping them in place here :D
;D
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Howard on 09/03/13 at 6:47 am
Do remember the 21st night of September?
The first day of Fall?
Subject: Re: 2004 II
Written By: Howard on 09/03/13 at 6:48 am
Why do you call a 39 year old a kid? Is 40 a kid too?
that's considered a "young adult".
Check for new replies or respond here...
Copyright 1995-2020, by Charles R. Grosvenor Jr.