Great rules! Maybe if these go across the board, everything will be alright! I once had the pissing submarines! You put them in the toilet and sink them. Potty target. Good link. Could work. For some reason, I think we need some adult diapers here too. Ultra protection. Us women stay out of it ; ) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIaORknS1Dk
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog" <raunchydog@...> wrote: > > Obbajeeba, you're quite right. Indiscriminate pissing on FFLife needs to be > more accurate. Let's give the dudes something to aim for. How about a pissing > contest? > > Pissing contest rules: > 1. Dudes only. > 2. Submit qualifying scores: time, distance, marksmanship. > 3. Unacceptable targets: women and children. > 4. Acceptable targets: trees, fire hydrants and each other. > > Training equipment: > http://pottytarget.com/products/ > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > She is awesome even if she does not like Ron Paul. ; ) > > That does not stop me from seeing her value and reason and respect. > > : ) > > Raunchy too. : ) > > Not like some dudes on this forum who piss the spot with complete teeth > > grinding bark, protection for their red fire hydrant in multiple layers of > > consciousness available if only to break through their awareness as > > something more that tangible, all muddled together 75 foot lead wall with > > dancing football cheerleaders in cowboy lingerie. > > Nabby not included. He has some morals about morals. > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog" <raunchydog@> wrote: > > > > > > Impeccable timeline, Judy. How *do* you do it? > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, zarzari_786 <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, zarzari_786 <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > <snip> > > > > > > > In fact, you should know, that Ravi takes clues from you > > > > > > > whom to abuse, and whom to spare. As long as you had > > > > > > > backed me up, he never mentioned me in an abusive way. > > > > > > > The moment you started to become critical at me, and > > > > > > > switched to your 'get-Barry' mode,(which actually > > > > > > > started first in our off-board exchange after two posts), > > > > > > > he started abusing me > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, this is the Troika's party line whenever someone > > > > > > other than me begins to criticize any of them; we've > > > > > > seen it many, many times. I believe Barry originated > > > > > > it some time ago. How nice to see you've picked up on > > > > > > as well. I'm sure you'll get a lot of use out of it. > > > > > > > > > > > > Implicit in it is the premise that nobody would *ever* > > > > > > come independently to any negative conclusions about > > > > > > any of the Troika and their allies; it wouldn't ever > > > > > > even occur to anybody that there was anything to be > > > > > > criticized about them if I hadn't spoken up. > > > > > > > > > > > > In this case, Ravi could *never* have read your > > > > > > exchange with Barry speculating about Robin's mental > > > > > > health and thought ill of you for it unless he'd > > > > > > gotten it from me. > > > > > > > > > > > > Right? > > > > > > > > > > Yes, right. It's a simple observation, Judy can't help it. > > > > > My accusations to masked zebra where much before, Ravi only > > > > > started when you gave the signal. > > > > > > > > Ravi had been here only intermittently and didn't > > > > necessarily plow through all the posts when he *was* > > > > here, so he may well not have seen whatever you're > > > > referring to. > > > > > > > > In any case, if he had really just been taking cues > > > > from others, he might well have taken his anti-zarzari > > > > cue from *Emily's* post. > > > > > > > > Oh, but Emily took her cue from me, right? > > > > > > > > Ooops, no, wait. My first response to your exchange > > > > with Barry was very mild, hardly denunciatory. It > > > > wasn't until Robin took after you big-time that I used > > > > the term "slimy" to refer to your post to Barry. And > > > > by that time Emily had already given the two of you a > > > > very thorough tongue-lashing, completely of her own > > > > accord. > > > > > > > > And Ravi didn't start going after you until you'd > > > > come back after your little vacation. That was *after* > > > > you'd already made several posts attacking me, but > > > > before I'd had a chance to respond. > > > > > > > > So I'm afraid your theory just doesn't fit the timeline. > > > > Too bad. > > > > > > > > > No clues > > > > > > > > The term you want here is "cues," not "clues." > > > > > > > > > to take from Barry here. This is a a again your insidious > > > > > insinuation. > > > > > > > > It's a reasonable assumption, given how many times Barry's > > > > used it (you responded "Bingo" to one such post); and > > > > Curtis has also used it quite recently. > > > > > > > > > >
