--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" <curtisdeltablues@> > wrote: > > > > -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1" <steve.sundur@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > You weren't here the first time around. You were > > > > absent from the group from before Thanksgiving > > > > till the end of March. The Barry-debacle took > > > > place in January. > > > > > > And here I thought he was lurking all that time. [:(] > > > > Of course I was. I can't imagine why a Judy Barry Dan > > battle didn't bring me out of lurk mode! I was letting > > absence make my heart grow fonder like when you use a > > feather duster on a chick when she is begging you for > > the cat-O-nine tails. (Did I say that last part out > > loud?) > > What Curtis had said that I was responding to: > > "As if my non particiapation the first time around was > not enough of a message that I didn't care about the > hilarity that ensued in the clusterfuck misadventures > of people who hate each other [yada yada]..." > > Curtis, when you're standing on your head trying to > cobble together a plausible case out of nothing for > someone else lying, it really doesn't look too good > when you lie yourself, and then when caught, lie again. > > (Yes, I get the "joke." No, it doesn't excuse the > dishonesty.)
Yeah. So the deal is that it wasn't interesting enough when I saw it the first time and I'm sure I didn't read every post because it was pretty easy to identify the type of thread, and my second reading didn't make the mess look any better, so that is what happened. I can't even follow your dishonesty bullshit enough to address it. My reporting on what I was doing when I was not posting is pretty much gunna have to be the last word and your opinion is not being solicited by me. I nailed you on your lie, and made my case. You misrepresented my position. We both know what you were up to. I called you on it and you doubled down. FFL mix tape. Nothing changes. However, since you have pursued this to the point of me having to triple think myself, I would like to say that I am not privy to Dan's intentions in posting that sentence the way he did. He may be more of an innocent than my summation "bullshit" conveys. So since I have had some nice posts with the guy I will give him the benefit of the doubt and assume that my reaction was more than he bargained for and was not his intention. I am still happy to have spoken up when I read it because it conveyed something I do not support. My assessment of what I read in the posts remains. I am most sorry that it was brought to my attention at all on a day with otherwise very compellingly deep communications with other posters. >
