SAM Behavior

She's got it rollin.

She's got it babe.

The big stick on you pal.

She'll ban you'll *s* straight up ...

so boy Gustav, listen to the woman with da POWER.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

If by skinny you mean slim, lean and strong, then yes. My height/weight is dead-on healthy, smack dab in the middle of the "normal" range of BMI. That's a good thing, not a bad thing. It's just too bad we can't say the same for the legions of buffalo here who have altered their perception of normality to include fat ugly slobs or in some people's cases here, fat ugly slobettes.

Thin is "in." Try it some time.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Confusing why? This isn't a case where non American is a lower status. This is a case where a dissenting American's anti-American opinion holds more weight than the anti-American opinion of just another angry foreign national who hates America. And these folks were DEFINITELY trying to avert attention away from their nationality for the purposes of this discussion.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Just a poor attempt at stereotypical humor on my part, WillNever, don't take it personally. I think Americans in general have tended to the overweight, out-of-shape side of the fence in the last few decades, so yes "thin is in" should be the way to go.

Of course it depends on your body type, on my frame, 190 - 200 is ideal (depending on whom you ask), but I have allowed an extra 5-10 pounds to creep on, guess I'm falling for the "laziness" in my old age. Either way, no one (to my knowledge) would look at me and say "God, you're a fatso!" I've always tended to weigh more than what I appear at first glance, even by trained observers such as police officers, physical trainers, etc. Another curiosity is that my waist size has only changed by 4" since I was 17. Don't quite understand that...

Not sure if it's a curse or blessing...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

You sound like a personal ad

Insecure much?

 

No but I've been thinking that about you.

 

You can do better than that ... can't you?

Oh, come now. You can do better than that, Will. Can't you?

 

Can you not either..?

 

Keep digging, you'll get there.

 

It's your material, man

I can only work with what you give me.

 

that's from a discussion bells had with sam over 2 years ago. more excerpts can be found in this thread. the trolls reading that would think they have walked into the twilight zone cos bells argues that holocaust denial should be legal while sam does not

what can we now infer from sam's position? holocaust denial is bad. why? because the fact that it happened is easily substantiated....etc
yet, 2 years down the road sam attempts to do just that. how does bells respond.........

oh dearie dearie me.
now what can i infer from bells's position? is she is questioning sam's motives for asking questions about the holocaust? how? by asking if she is a jew hater? indirectly asking sam if she is a nazi or nazi sympathizer by way of the rwandan analogy?

i mean, that was her grand entrance into the thread...an clear attempt to flame the thread into a closure by trolling with shit that had nothing to do with the op

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

well bells
so are mine

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

what evidence? what picture? that sam is a nazi loving jew hater?
again put up or shut the fuck up

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

yup
sam still got banned on some trumped up charges and you bells, are still at it, ready for round two....................

 

lemme illustrate the art of making inferences

day 1: bells is eats candy while sam looks on
day 2: the pig is still eating candy while sam unhappily looks on
day 3:the fat pig eats more candy and refuses to share with sam

i infer bells is a selfish pig
i could be mistaken tho
what if bells tells me that sam has her own candy and is hoarding it?

that is where the onus of giving an explanation passes on to you. you tell me my inference is wrong by sharing facts that i am not aware of. it is simple as that

so, do you have something substantive to give me to justify all your wild speculations on sam's motives with regards to whatever you hold her to be doing? what did you vote to ban her on? what were the charges you made or agreed with?? until you come out with a clear statement of what you know sam to be, what she represents rather than...

...that

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

either make the case or stfu. stop trolling. it is blatantly obvious that you hold her to be a jew hating nazi despite the lack of an explicit statement. one only has to look at your trollish rhetoric to figure out how.as far as i am concerned, that is the logical inference i make.

so far i only see white swans. show me the black one if you can

 

Speaking of SAM behavior, when the hell is sandy going to get banned? Shit is ridiculous.

 

/eek

string and his princess must be salivating

 

no
you put aside sam to speak of sandy

 

You are mistaking the situation, Tiasha. I'm not the one on the attack, here.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Quad, where exactly do you get the idea that a thread entitled: "SAM behavior" would be a good place to ask about Sandy getting banned?

Isn't there some sort of rule about staying on topic here?

/randwolf begins searching through dusty scrolls...

 

From the fact that the thread is in "Site feedback" and covers "SAM behavior," which is precisely the sort of behavior that sandy engages in.

Now, if it had been titled "SAM's behavior," that might be a different story. But I read the topic as referring to a type of behavior exemplified by SAM.

What is this, open-mic night for would-be mods?

 

Yes. Indeed. :m:

 

Stock up on antihist-sam-ines

Save yourself the sneezing, sir. And the headache from squinting through the faded hieroglyphics. I mean, of course there is, well, something of a rule. But these anti-SAMitic threads are so common that people get bored after a few pages (or, sometimes, from the outset), and the discussions starts to wander around until someone with the both the keys to the subforum and the inclination to pay attention to what's going on in the latest version notices and decides to shut it down.

Indeed, there is something of a rule against targeted threads, as well, but S.A.M. is the official unofficial exception to that rule. I mean, hell, Draqon got cranky about an inquiry regarding his genocidal outlook toward Poland and invoked the targeted-thread rule. I was able to shut that one down, but I don't have the necessary keys to enforce it here.