Curtis deliberately misrepresents what I said in an effort to switch the 
context his way. Again, standard. 

 My conclusion about why Turq got bounced was that he declared he was going to 
ignore anything Doug posted. Kind of like a football player announcing publicly 
that he was going to ignore anything the umpire said. How much longer do you 
think he'd stay in the game--or on the team, for that matter--after that? Just 
a *wee* bit different from "talking back" to the umpire. And Turq wasn't even 
addressing Doug when he said what he did.
 

 The implication of your "dead pool" remark was, of course, that I was sucking 
up to Doug to ensure I wouldn't get bounced, rather than just doing the right 
thing by defending him from the unfair and dishonest treatment he's been 
getting.
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <curtisdeltablues@...> wrote :

 
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <authfriend@...> wrote :

 
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <curtisdeltablues@...> wrote :

 (snip) 
 
But your support for him has eliminated you from the FFL dead pool so in the 
end your choice my be the wise one here if you still care to post.
 

 I resent the implication. Standard Curtis. As it happens, I don't intend to 
stay around much longer. 

Me: Nothing was implied Judy, it was all stated clearly. Even by your own 
analysis that opposing Doug/Buck may lead to being banned. It was your 
conclusion about why he bounced Barry for talking back to him. Being offended 
by the most obvious comment was your MO here so this is standard Judy. 

Judy:
The only reason I've stayed as long as I have is to try to keep you guys more 
honest than you would be otherwise.

Me: Always nice to end with a note of condescension and self aggrandizement so 
we know it is really you. 





  













Reply via email to