--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@...> wrote: <snip> > As should be obvious, I took advantage of stumbling > across Skolnick's name to plant some trollbait, which > I knew she'd be unable to resist, and would spend her > last two posts of the week on. > > My followup post, if it's not obvious to everyone even > though I didn't add a smiley face to it, was more > trollbait. I thought it would be fun to give her a > lesson in "the perils of irony."
Here's the hilarious truth, ladies and germs: Barry at first took my post seriously. His initial response was genuine, not "a lesson in the perils of irony" as he claims here. In between that response and these comments, he had the horrifying realization that I'd been making fun of him. It took awhile for him to figure out a way to try to cover up his howling blooper in an attempt to save face. (And BTW, I made only one post in response to Barry's initial post about Andrew, not two.) > Irony *has*, after all, been defined as "Saying what > you really believe, but pretending that you don't > believe it and that it's merely an attempt at humor" It's been defined this way only by Barry, immediately above. Of course, that isn't what irony is. > It's what Robin used to do all the time. No, it's not. > *Of course* on one level she thought she was kidding > about the impact she had on Andrew Skolnick. On the > other hand, I think all of us who watched her obsess > on him at the time and continue to obsess on him in > the many years since know that she really *does* > believe that she caused him to "rehabilitate" his > career. Could this possibly be any more pathetic? Barry knows everybody here will have realized I was making fun of him and will have snorted with laughter at his earlier post. So now he's pretending that he realized it too. He didn't. > I just thought I'd give her the chance to see what > it feels like to have an obvious joke interpreted as > if it were serious, the way (dare I say it) she tends > to do. I wouldn't be surprised if when she returns > later today that she tries to spin my post into > a thinly-veiled "death threat." :-) No, I'm just exposing Barry's stupidity and follow-up attempt at duplicity (which is even more stupid because it's so transparent). > The stuff I put in about Andrew believing that she > was the one who tried to get him fired was true, > however. And the fact that I agreed with him at > the time and still do is also true. How she'll > react to this is up to her. Trollbait. (Gee, I'm relieved to know it's up to me how to react.) This isn't trollbait, this is slander, plain and simple.
