The Official "rant/bitch/moan" Thread

Boston

ApeXaviour wrote:

Grr... Women, why do so many insist on being total headfukkers? Clinically I can admire the talent, but I don't see the motive?

Ah women, they suck.

Pet

LiouVille wrote:

Ah women, they suck.

Or not, as is sometimes the problem.



FEEL the misogyny!

Edit: Oh wow, read the related thread at the bottom entitled "Woman are weapons of Satan used to control men". Hilarious.

Boston

I got, "thiefing scum" and LGBT boards.

ApeXaviour

Awayindahils wrote:

I don't think there is a motive, it's just fun.

Sadistic mindfucking is fun? Wow, that's just perverse. And ye wonder why we commit suicide so much more often?
Get a real hobby...






Like knitting

Boston

ApeXaviour wrote:

Like knitting

or being preg'ers and bare footed.

Awayindahils

ApeXaviour wrote:

Like knitting

We have a knitting group in Exec already

Crash

Don't get me started on women. nothing better than having absolutely NO clue where you stand on ANYTHING. its driving me mad. but I dont care too much at the mo, so its ok. give it a week or two and i'll start getting pissed off.

Nietzschean

&#231 wrote: »

Don't get me started on women. nothing better than having absolutely NO clue where you stand on ANYTHING. its driving me mad. but I dont care too much at the mo, so its ok. give it a week or two and i'll start getting pissed off.

laid back neil is finally getting a bit tweaked eh?

Crash

nah, still laid back, just sleep deprived :P

Stargal

I nearly fainted when i saw John last night. What a complete girl. :rolleyes:

Don't get me started on women. nothing better than having absolutely NO clue where you stand on ANYTHING. its driving me mad. but I dont care too much at the mo, so its ok. give it a week or two and i'll start getting pissed off.

Why don't you just ask her what's going on? Seriously.

Boston

stargal wrote:

Why don't you just ask her what's going on? Seriously.

Ask a women a direct question about romantic relations? That's far to reasonable to ever work.

Stargal

Ask a women a direct question about romantic relations? That's far to reasonable to ever work.

Everyone always assumes that but if you try it it could actually work. I'm always very straight with my boyf about where we stand, and I expect the same in return. Playing games with people is pointless, unfair and immature.

/Goes off to bang head with a thesaurus for not being able to find a better word than 'boyf'

Partner, Lover, sweethart, sugarpuff, sugardaddy, sweety [there's a box of cereal on my floor], significant other, fella' (only works if you're from Wexford), lad, man, dude, guy, honey, associate, collaborator, spouse, mate (according to MS Word)

God I'm bored....

Tricity Bendix

stargal wrote:

/Goes off to bang head with a thesaurus for not being able to find a better word than 'boyf'

Just as well. Because if you didn't, I would have.

origional_psycho wrote:

Partner, Lover, sweethart, sugarpuff, sugardaddy, sweety [there's a box of cereal on my floor], significant other, fella' (only works if you're from Wexford), lad, man, dude, guy, honey, associate, collaborator, spouse, mate (according to MS Word)

Huh? Would have thought that meant something (almost) completely different.

Stargal

original_psycho wrote:

Partner, Lover, sweethart, sugarpuff, sugardaddy, sweety [there's a box of cereal on my floor], significant other, fella' (only works if you're from Wexford), lad, man, dude, guy, honey, associate, collaborator, spouse, mate (according to MS Word)

God I'm bored....

Partner - No. Makes me think of cowboys ("Howdy pardner..."). Which neither of us are.
Lover - Only if it's pronounced 'luv-ah'.
Sweetheart - Maybe when we're 70 and wearing slippers in front of cosy fires. But otherwise no.
Sugarpuff - Couldn't say that with a straight face.
Sugardaddy - No. I'm two months older than him. He is richer than me though
Sweetie - God no. I'm not 14.
Significant other - Too legalistic.
Fella - Only when used in the context of, "Are you fookin' lookin' at me fella? Cos if ye are I'll BAIT ye". Which I find occasion to use quite often.
Lad, dude, guy, honey, associate, spouse - To quote 2Unlimited: No, no, no, no, no, no
Man - This is ok I guess. But sounds a bit territorial to be talking about 'my man'.
Collaborator - Now this I like. It's not too mushy but it says a lot. Collaborator. Kind of rolls off the tongue, doesn't it.

And you think you're bored...

Edit: I like that this is my 666th post. Strangely appropriate. I'm now very glad that he never reads this thread.

Affiliate??

Tricity Bendix

boyfriend?

Stargal

Although I'm sure John gets loads of girls nearly fainting on him, unfortunately I'm not one of them.

Read the stickies.

stargal

stargal wrote:

Stickies Stickies Stickies, that gig is promoted by whom?

I was wondering about that.

John

stargal wrote:

I nearly fainted when i saw John last night

I don't blame you. I'm quite the dish.

europerson

[RANT]
Relationships FTL.
[/RANT]

Andrew 83

That's ridiculous editing Nietzschean. Saying that you nearly fainted at a concert is not discussing the promoters of it or even the event itself. That's going too far.

Also the way you edited it, without consulting the person who posted it, was very mean and potentially hurtful (I don't know if this was the case here). If you felt it necessary to remove the band's name, you could have done it more sensibly.

Get your act together.

Andrew 83

europerson wrote:

[RANT]
Relationships FTL.
[/RANT]

What does FTL mean?

Time Magazine

For the loss. Poor europerson .

Boston

Andrew 83 wrote:

That's ridiculous editing Nietzschean. Saying that you nearly fainted at a concert is not discussing the promoters of it or even the event itself. That's going too far.

The rules are very clear on the matter.

"In light of legal proceedings issued by MCD, we have been advised that there is to be no further discussion of MCD or events hosted by MCD."

How is "I fainted at X event" different from "I was nearly set on fire at X event". Agree or disagree with the rule but Ian didn't make it up, he just enforces it, and the admins have made it clear what they want from Mods in that regard.

btw It is far from standard to consult people before editing a post. These are the rules set in stone, you dont' get a say in it.

Andrew 83

LiouVille wrote:

The rules are very clear on the matter.

"In light of legal proceedings issued by MCD, we have been advised that there is to be no further discussion of MCD or events hosted by MCD."

How is "I fainted at X event" different from "I was nearly set on fire at X event". Agree or disagree with the rule but Ian didn't make it up, he just enforces it, and the admins have made it clear what they want from Mods in that regard.

btw It is far from standard to consult people before editing a post. These are the rules set in stone, you dont' get a say in it.

If you read my whole post you will see that I said if he felt it had to be edited it would have been sensible to just remove it and say that it was an event by a promoter not allowed to be mentioned. Adjusting the post to say she nearly fainted when she saw another member of the board is far from sensible. What if one of your posts was changed to say you nearly fainted when you saw me?


EDIT: Why couldn't he change it to 'I nearly fainted at a concert last night' rather than changing the whole post? Childish, terrible editing. And not the first time that I feel his moderating has been inappropriate.

Nietzschean

oh jesus andrew get a grip, i only edited so as it would be midly entertaining, given the fact i had to change it. John pointed it out to me that it infringed on the rules. Hence i just pop'd his name in, it shows up i changed it on the post, not like i was trying to cause problems.............

Boston

Andrew 83 wrote:

What if one of your posts was changed to say you nearly fainted when you saw me?

I'd take it as a very mean and hurtfull attack. I'd never forgiver Ian, and burn an effigy of him on this date, every year, untill I became bitter, vitriolic and decrepit. Yes thats what I'd do...

Andrew 83

Nietzschean wrote:

oh jesus andrew get a grip, i only edited so as it would be midly entertaining, given the fact i had to change it. John pointed it out to me that it infringed on the rules. Hence i just pop'd his name in, it shows up i changed it on the post, not like i was trying to cause problems.............

That may be but surely the whole point of the post was to rant/bitch/moan abour nearly fainting at a concert. You therefore negated the whole reason for the post. Save the entertaining for posts, not moderating.

Edwardius

burn an effigy

5th of november. Apt. One of the lads decided it was his right to burn down all the nightclubs in mullingar last night because of the weight of the occasion. So he did.