Orca posted...
Red XlV posted...
What a surprise that a scumbag outlet like the Daily Caller would say the rapist is the victim.
Hint: a "college hearing" is not the same thing as a trial, so describing this guy as being "found not guilty" is bulls***.
Not to mention he has a history, this wasn't his first victim. Basically the evidence against Emma is that she didn't act the way MRAs think victims react, even though there's countless examples of the opposite. And also they don't think that if you want to have sex with someone you can't be raped by them, even if they pin you down and rape you anally after you've said yes to something else.
I wonder what the terms of the settlement are. It seems like they just paid this guy off to make him stop.
When Left-Boxxy quotes Left-Knightmere in agreement you know that's the wrong side of an argument.
|
willythemailboy posted...
Red XlV posted...
Hint: a "college hearing" is not the same thing as a trial, so describing this guy as being "found not guilty" is bulls***.
It's substantially harder to be found "not responsible" in a college hearing than it is to be found "not guilty" in a criminal trial. So if he was found "not responsible" by the college, there is literally zero chance he'd have been found guilty in a trial; odds are there never would have been a trial at all.
Unsurprisingly, you offer no facts to support this assertion.
A bad enough dude to save the President.
"We chose more government instead of more freedom." - Marco Rubio (R-Florida) on the Bush administration
|
Dwavenhobble posted...
Catch up / Back Story
Emma Sulkowicz’ claims she was sexually assaulted.
It goes to a College hearing.
The person Emma Sulkowicz’ accused of raping her is freed and found not guilty.
Emma Sulkowicz then for her third hear art project carries a matres with her everywhere as an art project demonstrate physically the 'emotional burden she carries every day knowing her rapist is still allowed on campus and not locked up'
Sulkowicz becomes a very vocal campaigner against rape doing multiple interviews and naming the person she accuses of raping her multiple times.
After graduation she makes a porn film which she claims is so that people can see the horror she went through or something.
She also does another performance piece live on stage of her begin whipped while she was tied up.
The issue is part of Columbia universities rules state they have a duty to protect people cleared of rape from any further attacks on their name or them. The person Sulkowicz accused wasn't protected as Sulkowicz was free to accuse him of rape again and again to press and anyone else on campus she wanted. To spread claims against him that were proved false.
Worse it was show by him that Columbia University had actually refused to allow him to even present some of the evidence he had including texts from Sulkowicz asking for sex both before they had sex and for multiple weeks after.
New development
He's sued Columbia University and they've settled out of court with him after he sued for
"gender-based harassment and misconduct, as well as sexual harassment"
So thoughts?
Dude, proofread...at least a little bit. Anyway, sounds fair.
It's like punching a round bottom dummy. We all know it's futile, but occasionally it's fun.
- willythemailboy on the subject of stray orcas
|
Orca posted...
Argonian_Maid posted...
Orca posted...
Whose alt are you?
I'm my own alt. Duhhhhhhhhh.
Nah, you've been registered for 2 years but only have 85 karma + your posting history is all trolling. Nice cowardice.
Okay, so I'm not an alt. That makes your question pretty f***ing stupid, doesn't it?
|
Argonian_Maid posted...
Orca posted...
Argonian_Maid posted...
Orca posted...
Whose alt are you?
I'm my own alt. Duhhhhhhhhh.
Nah, you've been registered for 2 years but only have 85 karma + your posting history is all trolling. Nice cowardice.
Okay, so I'm not an alt. That makes your question pretty f***ing stupid, doesn't it?
You're obviously an alt. Accounts that aren't alts that are 2 years old don't have 85 karma unless their only logged into when someone's trolling. That makes you a coward.
|
zhukov1943 posted...
Fair, next.
Sweet dreams are made of cheese
Who am I to diss a brie?
|
(Topic Creator)1 day ago#57
Red XlV posted...
What a surprise that a scumbag outlet like the Daily Caller would say the rapist is the victim.
Hint: a "college hearing" is not the same thing as a trial, so describing this guy as being "found not guilty" is bulls***.
True it's not. College hearings have a far lower burden of proof and don't allow the accused the same rights or protections as a trail. E.G. They can deny his right to submit things as evidence for his defence or call witnesses or all kinds of other nonsense. Orca posted...
Not to mention he has a history, this wasn't his first victim. Basically the evidence against Emma is that she didn't act the way MRAs think victims react, even though there's countless examples of the opposite. And also they don't think that if you want to have sex with someone you can't be raped by them, even if they pin you down and rape you anally after you've said yes to something else.
I wonder what the terms of the settlement are. It seems like they just paid this guy off to make him stop.
You mean the person she suddenly claimed made her ill and scared was yet also the person for over a week after she was texting trying to convince them to have more sex with her? You know things like that. Things that don't add up in the slightest when you're claiming to be the victim and never want to be near the person. Oh and some of the other complains were thrown out too because oddly enough Emma had put them up to it. One of the complaints filed alongside Emma was withdrawn within days the others later were withdrawn too before Emma got him in the College Hearing. ClayGuida posted...
So how is she guilty of anything?
Well she agreed if the hearing found no evidence he was in the wrong that she would have to leave him alone and accept the judgement of the commission that he hadn't raped her. So her going on about how he had raped her and got away with it on campus and to the media etc was her violating that part of the College hearing agreement / College rules.
|
Dwavenhobble posted...
You mean the person she suddenly claimed made her ill and scared was yet also the person for over a week after she was texting trying to convince them to have more sex with her?
Many victims of assault from people who they trust have conflicted feelings and often try to regain normalcy. This is why the abused can remain with their abusers for years. Of course, you already knew this, you just conveniently forget it when it gets in the way of your prejudice. Dwavenhobble posted...
because oddly enough Emma had put them up to it
Please don't lie.
|
|
|
Nitro378 posted...
untrustful posted...
Rape should still be taken seriously though despite certain people of the matrix persuasion.
It should be punished in a court of law like every other crime.
Change "punished" to "tried" and I agree.
i7 4770k | TitanX SLI | Z87 Sabertooth | 32Gb CorsVeng @ 1866Mhz | 1TB/500Gb 850/840 EVOs, 1TB HDD | Corsair RM1000 | H100i | CM HAFX | Razor Mamba | Astro A50
|
Orca posted...
Dwavenhobble posted...
You mean the person she suddenly claimed made her ill and scared was yet also the person for over a week after she was texting trying to convince them to have more sex with her?
Many victims of assault from people who they trust have conflicted feelings and often try to regain normalcy. This is why the abused can remain with their abusers for years.
Of course, you already knew this, you just conveniently forget it when it gets in the way of your prejudice.
Dwavenhobble posted...
because oddly enough Emma had put them up to it
Please don't lie.
You're guessing at motives. Plus you're presuming that multiple people were in fact raped but all had conflicting feelings that resulted in them withdrawing their complaint. I can see victims not complaining, but withdrawing after the complaint seems less likely. I mean you need evidence. Otherwise all that stands is the fact that complaints were withdrawn, and a guess that Emma - who clearly had taken great effort to turn this into various art projects and to gain notoriety - convinced others to make complaints that they did not later pursue.
I don't drink. I don't smoke. I don't do drugs. I am your sXe hero.
They should build a mosque in mecca. Right next to the dome of the rock. -- Lord Sideous
|
AndreLeGeant posted...
You're guessing at motives.
So are you. The difference is one has a history (the accused rapist) and one doesn't (the accused false rape accuser). AndreLeGeant posted...
but withdrawing after the complaint seems less likely.
Based on what? Also, one was successful and overturned on a technicality, which they then wanted her to leave her new job to come back to the university and redo.
|
Orca posted...
AndreLeGeant posted...
You're guessing at motives.
So are you. The difference is one has a history (the accused rapist) and one doesn't (the accused false rape accuser).
AndreLeGeant posted...
but withdrawing after the complaint seems less likely.
Based on what?
Also, one was successful and overturned on a technicality, which they then wanted her to leave her new job to come back to the university and redo.
Getting a rehearing isn't a technicality.
I don't drink. I don't smoke. I don't do drugs. I am your sXe hero.
They should build a mosque in mecca. Right next to the dome of the rock. -- Lord Sideous
|
AndreLeGeant posted...
Orca posted...
AndreLeGeant posted...
You're guessing at motives.
So are you. The difference is one has a history (the accused rapist) and one doesn't (the accused false rape accuser).
AndreLeGeant posted...
but withdrawing after the complaint seems less likely.
Based on what?
Also, one was successful and overturned on a technicality, which they then wanted her to leave her new job to come back to the university and redo.
Getting a rehearing isn't a technicality.
Sure, if say, new evidence comes to light. This wasn't one of those cases though.
|
Do you know the basis for the rehearing? You said the case was dismissed because the accuser failed to attend the rehearing, but what was the basis for the grant of rehearing?
I don't drink. I don't smoke. I don't do drugs. I am your sXe hero.
They should build a mosque in mecca. Right next to the dome of the rock. -- Lord Sideous
|
Orca and Red are confirmed trolls. They are not even hiding it. Glad some liberals on this board are calling them out. Orca BTFO.
|
AndreLeGeant posted...
Do you know the basis for the rehearing? You said the case was dismissed because the accuser failed to attend the rehearing, but what was the basis for the grant of rehearing?
http://jezebel.com/how-to-make-an-accused-rapist-look-good-1682583526
|
Siaperaz posted...
Orca and Red are confirmed trolls. They are not even hiding it. Glad some liberals on this board are calling them out. Orca BTFO.
Aren't you the guy who cried because GLOW had an abortion storyline?
|
Dwavenhobble posted...
The issue is part of Columbia universities rules state they have a duty to protect people cleared of rape from any further attacks on their name or them.
Not guilty in a court of law =/= clearing someone's name.
You don't need a treaty to have free trade. M Rothbard
{Self-Hating Token Asian of the Ivory Tower's Zionist Elite}
|
Red XlV posted...
What a surprise that a scumbag outlet like the Daily Caller would say the rapist is the victim.
Hint: a "college hearing" is not the same thing as a trial, so describing this guy as being "found not guilty" is bulls***.
She refused to press charges because she knew the police would need to actually INVESTIGATE and find evidence. By getting the college to go after him she's not legally liable for bringing false charges against him.
|
Wait, so she signed a contract that she wouldn't advocate against the person that raped her? That seems weird. Also, still waiting for the article on how colleges aren't indeed hiding rapes on campuses, that'd be the first compared to the plethora of those that are. Rape and college literally got hand in hand at the moment. That's why there's been such a huge uprising.
|
Orca posted...
AndreLeGeant posted...
Do you know the basis for the rehearing? You said the case was dismissed because the accuser failed to attend the rehearing, but what was the basis for the grant of rehearing?
http://jezebel.com/how-to-make-an-accused-rapist-look-good-1682583526
Can you give me the one sentence answer to why rehearing was granted?
I don't drink. I don't smoke. I don't do drugs. I am your sXe hero.
They should build a mosque in mecca. Right next to the dome of the rock. -- Lord Sideous
|
AndreLeGeant posted...
Orca posted...
AndreLeGeant posted...
Do you know the basis for the rehearing? You said the case was dismissed because the accuser failed to attend the rehearing, but what was the basis for the grant of rehearing?
http://jezebel.com/how-to-make-an-accused-rapist-look-good-1682583526
Can you give me the one sentence answer to why rehearing was granted?
The charge brought by Josie was the only one on which Nungesser was initially found "responsible," with a sentence of disciplinary probation. But that finding was later overturned; Nungesser's appeal cited various errors and improprieties, including the admission of hearsay, and claimed that the burden of proof—"preponderance of the evidence"—had not been met.
But the whole article is essential reading if you want to have an opinion on this case.
|
arguing with orca is like trying to catch the spot on the wall.
Gamertag XL: CRAZYjump, PSN: CRAZIERjump
Winner: Dark Souls.....2, Honorable Mentions: Fallout 3, Gears of War, Left 4 Dead, Dead Space, Bioshock
|
Orca posted...
AndreLeGeant posted...
Orca posted...
AndreLeGeant posted...
Do you know the basis for the rehearing? You said the case was dismissed because the accuser failed to attend the rehearing, but what was the basis for the grant of rehearing?
http://jezebel.com/how-to-make-an-accused-rapist-look-good-1682583526
Can you give me the one sentence answer to why rehearing was granted?
The charge brought by Josie was the only one on which Nungesser was initially found "responsible," with a sentence of disciplinary probation. But that finding was later overturned; Nungesser's appeal cited various errors and improprieties, including the admission of hearsay, and claimed that the burden of proof—"preponderance of the evidence"—had not been met.
But the whole article is essential reading if you want to have an opinion on this case.
Admission of hearsay and misplaced burden aren't technicalities. Those are extremely key things in law.
I don't drink. I don't smoke. I don't do drugs. I am your sXe hero.
They should build a mosque in mecca. Right next to the dome of the rock. -- Lord Sideous
|
None of those things were proven, Andre. That's just what he claimed. Also, this was a tribunal, not a law, so they're not key parts of anything. Also, read the entire article.
|
Orca posted...
None of those things were proven, Andre. That's just what he claimed.
Also, read the entire article.
If it wasn't overturned for the reasons stated in the appeal pleading it couldn't be overturned unless for a jurisdictional reason. Judicial appellate bodies can't reverse sua sponte except for jurisdictional reasons. Which obviously weren't present here because another hearing was scheduled. And LOL at decrying an appellate board's reversal if you don't even have the decision. You already decried as a technicality what appears to be fundamental due process violations
I don't drink. I don't smoke. I don't do drugs. I am your sXe hero.
They should build a mosque in mecca. Right next to the dome of the rock. -- Lord Sideous
|
Also this is the telling of events from the woman who won her case; http://jezebel.com/i-am-not-a-pretty-little-liar-1705996719Another essential read.
|
|
|
AndreLeGeant posted...
If it wasn't overturned for the reasons stated in the appeal pleading it couldn't be overturned unless for a jurisdictional reason
Right, a technicality. He appealed and she had to withdraw, so her evidence wasn't re-admissable. Thus a technicality, he wasn't cleared because he had evidence proving her wrong or him innocent (or that it was hearsay or that the burden was not met), he was cleared because her old evidence was inadmissible due to a technicality. I'm not saying the technicality is wrong, just that it's not evidence of anything other than a technicality. If you have evidence that his claim of hearsay and failing to meet the standard of evidence was true, please post it. (Once again, read the articles please, it goes into this in way more detail and chances are any questions you do have are addressed directly in those articles)
|
Red XlV posted...
willythemailboy posted...
Red XlV posted...
Hint: a "college hearing" is not the same thing as a trial, so describing this guy as being "found not guilty" is bulls***.
It's substantially harder to be found "not responsible" in a college hearing than it is to be found "not guilty" in a criminal trial. So if he was found "not responsible" by the college, there is literally zero chance he'd have been found guilty in a trial; odds are there never would have been a trial at all.
Unsurprisingly, you offer no facts to support this assertion.
Because only a pedantic troll needs the obvious pointed out to them. Even ORCA wouldn't argue against my point here. She failed to demonstrate, even to the 50.01% "preponderance of evidence" standard, that a rape took place. You're saying the set of evidence that failed to prove a rape "probably happened" would meet the 99.99% "beyond reasonable doubt" standard of a criminal trial? Whatever drugs you're on need to be regulated more thoroughly. It's dangerous to have people that far out of touch with reality wandering around on their own.
He who laughs last, thinks fastest.
|
AndreLeGeant posted...
You already decried as a technicality what appears to be fundamental due process violations
What part of this are you not understanding? People like Orca and Red want to eliminate due process because it is "too slanted in the rapist's favor". They don't even bother calling them the "accused rapist"; in their ideal world all accusations would get show trials and automatic convictions.
He who laughs last, thinks fastest.
|
Good. Colleges and universities and the administrators they employ are not police and courts and should have absolutely nothing to do with criminal justice. They shouldn't be conducting sexual assault/rape cases in the first place. Schools will never be unbiased enough to deal with this issue properly as a school's primary goal will always be PR. They have no business propping up kangaroo courts Campus rapes should be reported to police, not the school. Just like priests raping kids shouldn't be reported to the church for punishment, they should be reported to the police to go through the same justice system as everyone else. That's why we have due process and the police.
|
Does anybody want to explain to me how this random college kid has had multiple people accuse him of rape, and it isnt indicative of anything? Literally every male I know hasn't been accused of rape. I have literally never heard of it irl. This person has had multiple people come forward about it, and half this board just says "yeah they're all liars." You have an extremely twisted worldview if you think false rape accusations are common enough to be made multiple times against one person.
|
This is the typical 261 s*** topic. People immediately pick sides based on the victims' race, sexuality, religion or gender without needing to thoughtfully process any facts or laws. Or even if they do it's through the lens of heavy, heavy confirmation bias. I mean, do any of us seriously think Orca would ever support the male in any case?
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
Rico, YOU know what to DO!
|
Ah good old university drumheads...
i7 4770k | TitanX SLI | Z87 Sabertooth | 32Gb CorsVeng @ 1866Mhz | 1TB/500Gb 850/840 EVOs, 1TB HDD | Corsair RM1000 | H100i | CM HAFX | Razor Mamba | Astro A50
|
Welcommatt posted...
This person has had multiple people come forward about it, and half this board just says "yeah they're all liars."
Maybe, just maybe, SJW-types on campus bought Sulkowicz's version of the story, saw her dragging a mattress around campus, and decided they'd do whatever they could to ensure "justice" for the "victim". Is that not at all possible?
|
darkace77450 posted...
Welcommatt posted...
This person has had multiple people come forward about it, and half this board just says "yeah they're all liars."
Maybe, just maybe, SJW-types on campus bought Sulkowicz's version of the story, saw her dragging a mattress around campus, and decided they'd do whatever they could to ensure "justice" for the "victim". Is that not at all possible?
I mean, at least one of the other supposed incidents came before mattress girl. But whatever floats your boat dude, you normally have alright opinions on other stuff so I'm sure you have your reasons to trust one person over 5.
|
darkace77450 posted...
Welcommatt posted...
This person has had multiple people come forward about it, and half this board just says "yeah they're all liars."
Maybe, just maybe, SJW-types on campus bought Sulkowicz's version of the story, saw her dragging a mattress around campus, and decided they'd do whatever they could to ensure "justice" for the "victim". Is that not at all possible?
I'm not sure that'd extend to multiple people coming forth with stories of their own. But overall, I don't think there's enough evidence to actually penalize the guy.
Ring the bells that still can ring/Forget your perfect offering/There is a crack in everything/That's how the light gets in."- RIP, Leonard Cohen
|
Welcommatt posted...
darkace77450 posted...
Welcommatt posted...
This person has had multiple people come forward about it, and half this board just says "yeah they're all liars."
Maybe, just maybe, SJW-types on campus bought Sulkowicz's version of the story, saw her dragging a mattress around campus, and decided they'd do whatever they could to ensure "justice" for the "victim". Is that not at all possible?
I mean, at least one of the other supposed incidents came before mattress girl.
But whatever floats your boat dude, you normally have alright opinions on other stuff so I'm sure you have your reasons to trust one person over 5.
I wasn't trying to be snide. I was just presenting it as a possibility.
|
Red XlV posted...
What a surprise that a scumbag outlet like the Daily Caller would say the rapist is the victim.
Hint: a "college hearing" is not the same thing as a trial, so describing this guy as being "found not guilty" is bulls***.
You're right. It's not the same thing as a trial at all. Because it's much less fair than a trial to the defendant. AFAIK, you're not allowed representation to defend yourself and the standard for guilt is if you they believe you are more likely to be guilty than not rather than guilty beyond reasonable doubt. So the fact their sham trial saw fit not to "convict" him says a whole lot.
*sigh* Lemme get my TI-83 ...WTF!? Piece of trash!!*throws it away*~Rodri316 during his proof of why -4^2=16
All Hail BlAcK TuRtLe!
|
darkace77450 posted...
Welcommatt posted...
darkace77450 posted...
Welcommatt posted...
This person has had multiple people come forward about it, and half this board just says "yeah they're all liars."
Maybe, just maybe, SJW-types on campus bought Sulkowicz's version of the story, saw her dragging a mattress around campus, and decided they'd do whatever they could to ensure "justice" for the "victim". Is that not at all possible?
I mean, at least one of the other supposed incidents came before mattress girl.
But whatever floats your boat dude, you normally have alright opinions on other stuff so I'm sure you have your reasons to trust one person over 5.
I wasn't trying to be snide. I was just presenting it as a possibility.
Ok, that makes more sense. Additionally, I looked into the background of the case, and one of the accusers was actually a male student. I don't know if that has any effect on the credibility of the accusation, but it's just an interesting tidbit imo.
|
-Kicksave- posted...
This is the typical 261 s*** topic. People immediately pick sides based on the victims' race, sexuality, religion or gender without needing to thoughtfully process any facts or laws. Or even if they do it's through the lens of heavy, heavy confirmation bias.
I mean, do any of us seriously think Orca would ever support the male in any case?
Someone's confused as to why I wouldn't side with someone who's most likely a rapist. That's... strange.
|
Welcommatt posted...
You have an extremely twisted worldview if you think false rape accusations are common enough to be made multiple times against one person.
Assuming that is the prosecutor's fallacy, which I'll admit is a little tough to get your head around the first time you read about it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prosecutor%27s_fallacyOrca posted...
Someone's confused as to why I wouldn't side with someone who's most likely a rapist. That's... strange.
Is there any evidence of the rape beyond the possibly spurious accusation? Because the court doesn't seem to think so.
It's like punching a round bottom dummy. We all know it's futile, but occasionally it's fun.
- willythemailboy on the subject of stray orcas
|
(Topic Creator)18 hours ago#95
Orca posted...
Dwavenhobble posted...
You mean the person she suddenly claimed made her ill and scared was yet also the person for over a week after she was texting trying to convince them to have more sex with her?
Many victims of assault from people who they trust have conflicted feelings and often try to regain normalcy. This is why the abused can remain with their abusers for years.
Of course, you already knew this, you just conveniently forget it when it gets in the way of your prejudice.
Dwavenhobble posted...
because oddly enough Emma had put them up to it
Please don't lie.
I'm not lying it was very much discovered during this whole thing playing out. But then you already knew and chose to ignore it. Also Emma wasn't "With" the person she accused in the sense of a couple always together, she had no real reason to want to be near him again if what she claimed was true. Which BTW Campus hearings found no evidence of. Barenziah Boy Toy posted...
Not guilty in a court of law =/= clearing someone's name.
No because we've entered a stage where even if someone is convicted people are happy to believe they're monsters / guilty and somehow escaped justice and should instead be punished by society. This wasn't some escape on a technicality this was there was 0 evidence beyond her word of what happened and evidence on the part of the person she accused that disproved her claims even without the text messages and other things that the hearing refused to allow as evidence. ClayGuida posted...
Wait, so she signed a contract that she wouldn't advocate against the person that raped her? That seems weird.
Also, still waiting for the article on how colleges aren't indeed hiding rapes on campuses, that'd be the first compared to the plethora of those that are. Rape and college literally got hand in hand at the moment. That's why there's been such a huge uprising.
He was cleared. Under the rules of the College if someone is clear you can't then keep claiming they're guilty of the crime and trying to drum up hate against them. It's about respecting the ruling of the hearing. willythemailboy posted...
Because only a pedantic troll needs the obvious pointed out to them. Even ORCA wouldn't argue against my point here.
She failed to demonstrate, even to the 50.01% "preponderance of evidence" standard, that a rape took place. You're saying the set of evidence that failed to prove a rape "probably happened" would meet the 99.99% "beyond reasonable doubt" standard of a criminal trial?
Whatever drugs you're on need to be regulated more thoroughly. It's dangerous to have people that far out of touch with reality wandering around on their own.
It's Social Justice Cool Aide they've been on it a while and it's pretty mad it seems lol Welcommatt posted...
Does anybody want to explain to me how this random college kid has had multiple people accuse him of rape, and it isnt indicative of anything?
Literally every male I know hasn't been accused of rape. I have literally never heard of it irl.
This person has had multiple people come forward about it, and half this board just says "yeah they're all liars."
You have an extremely twisted worldview if you think false rape accusations are common enough to be made multiple times against one person.
They were Emma's Friends and associates who accused him
|
I'm not lying it was very much discovered during this whole thing playing out.
Please stop lying.
Also Emma wasn't "With" the person she accused in the sense of a couple always together,
I know you're a foreveralone, but surely you've read about friends before.
|
(Topic Creator)17 hours ago#97
Orca posted...
I'm not lying it was very much discovered during this whole thing playing out.
Please stop lying.
Also Emma wasn't "With" the person she accused in the sense of a couple always together,
I know you're a foreveralone, but surely you've read about friends before.
So you got nothing left again and are throwing shade? Is today the day your wife is off seeing her boyfriend?
|
Orca posted...
Argonian_Maid posted...
Orca posted...
Argonian_Maid posted...
Orca posted...
Whose alt are you?
I'm my own alt. Duhhhhhhhhh.
Nah, you've been registered for 2 years but only have 85 karma + your posting history is all trolling. Nice cowardice.
Okay, so I'm not an alt. That makes your question pretty f***ing stupid, doesn't it?
You're obviously an alt.
Damn, you're flip flopping more than a democrat. Make up your mind, son.
|
Nah, you're clearly an alt. You can't be "yourself" and an "alt". No flip flopping.
|
Orca posted...
Nah, you're clearly an alt.
Glad you've finally settled on one side of the issue.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment
Public Comments