Fornits Home for Wayward Web Fora An open discussion about the troubled parent industry
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
On 2006-01-13 12:26:00, Anonymous wrote:"I'll get right on it. "
Question with boldness even the existance of a god; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear.--Thomas Jefferson, U.S. President, author, scientist, architect, educator, and diplomat
On 2006-01-11 21:11:00, Anonymous wrote:"The best way to undermine a system of open and cooperative wordplay is to assert, in various and yet similar formulaic patterns, an ongoing replay of the obstacle. The obstacle is a bonding of words designed to accomplish the following: a weakening or complete breakdown of the host?s ability to ignore or deal constructively with insults, a reduction or elimination of the host?s rational faculties in favor of irrationality and acute anger, and a momentary or lingering loss of the host?s ability to articulate thoughts clearly. The endgame for those who seek to subvert a group is threefold: a breakdown of trust, a collapse of clear communication, and the coveted result of group member against group member, which is the prize of the saboteur. The recent surges in word attacks seem almost calculated. They are too virus-like in their one-sidedness, too self-aware to be progressive manifestations of so many people word-jostling each other and growing sickened by the monotony of it. So why assume that every word attack originates in the fingers of a survivor? Why not consider the alternative? "
"The best way to undermine a system of open and cooperative wordplay is to assert, in various and yet similar formulaic patterns, an ongoing replay of the obstacle. The obstacle is a bonding of words designed to accomplish the following: a weakening or complete breakdown of the host?s ability to ignore or deal constructively with insults, a reduction or elimination of the host?s rational faculties in favor of irrationality and acute anger, and a momentary or lingering loss of the host?s ability to articulate thoughts clearly. The endgame for those who seek to subvert a group is threefold: a breakdown of trust, a collapse of clear communication, and the coveted result of group member against group member, which is the prize of the saboteur. The recent surges in word attacks seem almost calculated. They are too virus-like in their one-sidedness, too self-aware to be progressive manifestations of so many people word-jostling each other and growing sickened by the monotony of it. So why assume that every word attack originates in the fingers of a survivor? Why not consider the alternative?"
"The best way to undermine a system of open and cooperative wordplay is to assert, in various and yet similar formulaic patterns, an ongoing replay of the obstacle. The obstacle is a bonding of words designed to accomplish the following: a weakening or complete breakdown of the host?s ability to ignore or deal constructively with insults, a reduction or elimination of the host?s rational faculties in favor of irrationality and acute anger, and a momentary or lingering loss of the host?s ability to articulate thoughts clearly. The endgame for those who seek to subvert a group is threefold: a breakdown of trust, a collapse of clear communication, and the coveted result of group member against group member, which is the prize of the saboteur. The recent surges in word attacks seem almost calculated. They are too virus-like in their one-sidedness, too self-aware to be progressive manifestations of so many people word-jostling each other and growing sickened by the monotony of it. So why assume that every word attack originates in the fingers of a survivor? Why not consider the alternative? "
On 2006-01-24 22:41:00, Anonymous wrote:"Quote"The best way to undermine a system of open and cooperative wordplay is to assert, in various and yet similar formulaic patterns, an ongoing replay of the obstacle. The obstacle is a bonding of words designed to accomplish the following: a weakening or complete breakdown of the host?s ability to ignore or deal constructively with insults, a reduction or elimination of the host?s rational faculties in favor of irrationality and acute anger, and a momentary or lingering loss of the host?s ability to articulate thoughts clearly. The endgame for those who seek to subvert a group is threefold: a breakdown of trust, a collapse of clear communication, and the coveted result of group member against group member, which is the prize of the saboteur. The recent surges in word attacks seem almost calculated. They are too virus-like in their one-sidedness, too self-aware to be progressive manifestations of so many people word-jostling each other and growing sickened by the monotony of it. So why assume that every word attack originates in the fingers of a survivor? Why not consider the alternative?"Quote"The best way to undermine a system of open and cooperative wordplay is to assert, in various and yet similar formulaic patterns, an ongoing replay of the obstacle. The obstacle is a bonding of words designed to accomplish the following: a weakening or complete breakdown of the host?s ability to ignore or deal constructively with insults, a reduction or elimination of the host?s rational faculties in favor of irrationality and acute anger, and a momentary or lingering loss of the host?s ability to articulate thoughts clearly. The endgame for those who seek to subvert a group is threefold: a breakdown of trust, a collapse of clear communication, and the coveted result of group member against group member, which is the prize of the saboteur. The recent surges in word attacks seem almost calculated. They are too virus-like in their one-sidedness, too self-aware to be progressive manifestations of so many people word-jostling each other and growing sickened by the monotony of it. So why assume that every word attack originates in the fingers of a survivor? Why not consider the alternative? "Quote"The best way to undermine a system of open and cooperative wordplay is to assert, in various and yet similar formulaic patterns, an ongoing replay of the obstacle. The obstacle is a bonding of words designed to accomplish the following: a weakening or complete breakdown of the host?s ability to ignore or deal constructively with insults, a reduction or elimination of the host?s rational faculties in favor of irrationality and acute anger, and a momentary or lingering loss of the host?s ability to articulate thoughts clearly. The endgame for those who seek to subvert a group is threefold: a breakdown of trust, a collapse of clear communication, and the coveted result of group member against group member, which is the prize of the saboteur. The recent surges in word attacks seem almost calculated. They are too virus-like in their one-sidedness, too self-aware to be progressive manifestations of so many people word-jostling each other and growing sickened by the monotony of it. So why assume that every word attack originates in the fingers of a survivor? Why not consider the alternative? ""
On 2006-02-23 07:36:00, Anonymous wrote:"And YOU are in love with each & every one of them, motherfucker. You wanna tongue their assholes, admit it! :lol: :lol: "
