Page 4 of 6
Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 7:24 am
by Scourge
Law wrote:scourge34 wrote:Don't be mad at me because you can only handle the information that is in front of you at the moment.
Don't be mad at me because you can't handle the information that is in front of you at the moment.
Wow repeating my post. How original.
Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 7:25 am
by Scourge
Here's where you post about my replying three times in a row.
Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 7:25 am
by LawL
scourge34 wrote:Law wrote:Then you had to go back, check out the general position on page, general length of post, check out whether there's quotes or not (and of course read it for the second time) for each and every post you wish to reply to, when you could have simply just hit the quote button upon the first reading.
And missed out on any subsequent post that might make your reply useless or redundant. Good job.
That's not an issue for me as it's not possible for my replies to be useless or redundant. Much as it's not an issue for you - all your replies are useless and redundant.
Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 7:26 am
by LawL
scourge34 wrote:Here's where you post about my replying three times in a row.
What's the point, it's like telling a Mongo that he's ugly.
Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 7:28 am
by Scourge
Keep telling yoursel that.
Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 7:28 am
by LawL
No need, I already know it's true.
Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 7:29 am
by Scourge
Law wrote:scourge34 wrote:Here's where you post about my replying three times in a row.
What's the point, it's like telling a Mongo that he's ugly.
Like telling you you're stupid.
Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 7:30 am
by Scourge
Law wrote:No need, I already know it's true.
That you're an ugly mong? Yeah I know.
Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 7:32 am
by Scourge
Pussy.
Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 7:35 am
by LawL
scourge34 wrote:Law wrote:scourge34 wrote:Here's where you post about my replying three times in a row.
What's the point, it's like telling a Mongo that he's ugly.
Like telling you you're stupid.
Apart from the fact that it's not true, yeah.
Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 7:36 am
by Scourge
Uh-huh.
Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 7:36 am
by LawL
scourge34 wrote:Law wrote:No need, I already know it's true.
That you're an ugly mong? Yeah I know.
You see scourge this is what happens when you randomly click about the page and don't really know which post you're replying to. You end up making no sense and looking like a moron.
Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 7:36 am
by Scourge
You've already shown evidence to the contrary.
Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 7:36 am
by LawL
scourge34 wrote:Pussy.
Faggot.
Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 7:37 am
by LawL
scourge34 wrote:You've already shown evidence to the contrary.
Wrong again Randy.
Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 7:38 am
by Scourge
Law wrote:scourge34 wrote:Law wrote:No need, I already know it's true.
That you're an ugly mong? Yeah I know.
You see scourge this is what happens when you randomly click about the page and don't really know which post you're replying to. You end up making no sense and looking like a moron.
Jeez, you can't even follow a chain of events. Sad.
Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 7:38 am
by LawL
Damn, basic logic is too complex for you. Sad.
Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 7:45 am
by Scourge
You seem to be the one struggling with it.
Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 7:47 am
by Scourge
Law wrote:scourge34 wrote:You've already shown evidence to the contrary.
Wrong again Randy.
Contrary to what? I bet you can't even tell me with your lack of comprehension.
Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 7:47 am
by LawL
You're the one who needs to read posts several times before you are unable to combine more than one idea in a post.
Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 7:48 am
by LawL
scourge34 wrote:You've already shown evidence to the contrary.
Contrary to what? I bet you can't even tell me with your lack of comprehension.
Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 7:49 am
by Scourge
Really? Show me where I said that.
Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 7:51 am
by LawL
Now come on scourge, you admit to reading the threads several times over before you can even muster up a reply, now you want me to go back and start rereading the thread for you as well? lol, sorry Randy, you'll just have to struggle with what a spastic you are on your own.
Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 7:52 am
by Scourge
Law wrote:scourge34 wrote:You've already shown evidence to the contrary.
Contrary to what? I bet you can't even tell me with your lack of comprehension.
You're intelligence. This entire thread is an example.
Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 7:52 am
by Scourge
Law wrote:Now come on scourge, you admit to reading the threads several times over before you can even muster up a reply, now you want me to go back and start rereading the thread for you as well? lol, sorry Randy, you'll just have to struggle with what a spastic you are on your own.
Really? show me where I said that.