DS and DTV Part 67.

[jp761]

Can’t believe anyone defends Twattie21. Probably the creepiest guy on DS which given the competition is quite the acheivement. I’ve met so called male feminazi/ feminists before and most are invariably full of shit and just trot out the same bollocks they think women want to hear. He’s quite happy to shit on men to try and show their caring side but just ends up looking like a dick. With Scottie I don’t believe half of what he says he believes himself.

He does only target people like JP and it’s bullshit that he cares in the slightest about victim blaming. It’s all an act.

Go and have a lie down. You need to get a grip of your obsession and delusions.

Hi Scottie! We know you post here. *Waves*

Waves back.

Now you know who I am, who are you?

I’m one of the women on DS you’ve been creepy too. It’s not just JP or Keyser that does PMs to women is it Scottie. You’re more subtle than the obvious men on there that most people mention over on here but make no mistake, you’re no better.

Now off you trot back to DS to carry on your trolling and creepiness. There’s a good boy.

Buddy I don't do creepy PMs, no evidence of that. Argumentative ones yep, replying in kind, as I've said I treat women no different to men, if they can give verbal, they can take it back.

[jp761]

It really doesn’t surprise me Scottie or Twattie as some call him PMs women. Creepy sleekit little fucker that one.

I am not a huge fan of JP but at leat he’s more upfront than this guy. What you see is what you get with him. With Scottie it’s underhand insincere and fake.

You're right about that one mate. In some cases a lot of this stuff maybe to do with the kind of women people have grown up with, and associated with.

Women in my family, and other women who I've been friends with, or been in relationships with. Have been the kind of women who expect to get a few words back if they give a man over-the-top grief, they don't want to be treated with kid gloves. They don't take any prisoners, but they also expect verbal back, at times. They wont start crying about that.

[jra]

I had a few posts removed today from muggins and hobbit. Work in progress.

That's not quite true is it

you may have alerted but the mods clearly went back to the post that caused the issues, you know the one, the one where you asked Muggins what she did to deserve an act of violence against her property, that was the first post removed - I certainly didn't receive an email to say posts had been removed, so I doubt Muggins did either

but carrry on alerting because the irony of you causing your own ban next time will be delicious


edit - and let's remember who 'started' this conversation before you go all weepy about your victim status

Which thread?

The car in the swimming pool one, the posts are gone (I made 2)

Muggins posted - My ex-husband went to the effort of snapping every single LP I had in half before giving them back to me (I had over 150 of them!).

https://forums.digitalspy.com/discussio ... t_87963778

JRA asked what she had done to deserve that, or said she must have deserved it, that was the first post the mods deleted

he probably has screen grabs

I remember now. The actual wording to muggins was 'what did you do to piss your husband off so much .....'. The victim blaming thing came from another thread (*). So all alomg hobbit has been misquoting me and I've got sucked into it.

(*) The jail time that is.

[jp761]

Like Scottie or not, someone is trying reeeeeeally hard today to make something stick.

The thing is those pesky little guests do hold lot of power here. If they decide to go at anyone, it's far easier for them as no one knows who they are on DS. This also applies when guests go at guests.

[jp761]

I really don’t see the problem in asking what Muggins did. I knew a guy who’s girlfriend found out he cheated on her and she vandalised his car. Nothing like putting it in a swimming pool but when we saw it we asked him what he did to deserve it. Fairly standard.

This isn’t victim blaming and it’s also not when JRA asked Muggins. People need to stop being so damn sensitive. I honestly think Canucklehead and Hobbit Feet are now just trying to find anything they can just to get at JRA.

Sensitive? Isn't jra the one who said he was alerting? Think you've got your wires crossed there.

JRAs not accusing everyone of victim blaming for really silly and unimportant things so maybe you’ve got your wires crossed?

I don’t see any problem with him alerting people that bait and target him on DS to be fair.a few of them clearly do which is a clear breach of DS T&Cs. i think most people would have done it long before now so they are lucky he’s not been the alerting type as a few would definitely be banned on DS by now. They don’t like that sort of thing.

Exactly. I've let a lot of it slide of the years, because I'm not the alerting type, especially when it doesn't involve discussion with me.

Yep same here it seemed petty. But maybe fighting fire with fire is the better option these days. I spotted one yesterday, Christa said Ret was sounding more batshit than usual. It was in the now closed demonisation thread(what a dumbarse thread that was in many a way), though. It's probably against the T&C's though, it is abusive. I don't blame you fighting fire with fire, if you can be arsed, why not.

With a lot of these posters the only reason they get away with things is because no one has bothered reporting them. I'm sure there are plenty of posts around which break the T&C's, if someone looks hard enough.

Regrading muggins who you mentioned in another post, I'm surprised she crossed the line of DS T&C's though.

[Nucks]

Can someone clarify what differentiates replying from baiting? I've been accused of baiting and I don't quite understand how that works on this thread that is specifically for discussing things posted on DS.

[Guest]

Can someone clarify what differentiates replying from baiting? I've been accused of baiting and I don't quite understand how that works on this thread that is specifically for discussing things posted on DS.

I might be able to help, as an original long time member and now an occasional lookerer iner. This whole forum is based around baiting and trolling, well in this section of the forum in particular. I tend to find if the person agrees with you (or is a friend so to speak) then it's replying. If they don't like you or the person you're replying about, it's baiting.

The best way to deal with it is to go with the flow and not let it bother you. There will always be two sides to an argument and two sets of people that see things differently. Enjoy the ride and have some fun is my advice.

[Guest]

Like Scottie or not, someone is trying reeeeeeally hard today to make something stick.

The thing is those pesky little guests do hold lot of power here. If they decide to go at anyone, it's far easier for them as no one knows who they are on DS. This also applies when guests go at guests.

The majority of members don't advertise who they are on DS either. Different usernames and outright lies or pretendy 'its not a secret' who I am. They could be a saint over there and a dick here or vice versa.

[Guest]

Some of these more extreme feminists do more harm than good for other women. The vast majority of women are strong and more than capable of looking after themselves. Idiots like taglet think all women are incapable and unable to fend for themselves. So she thinks it's upto her to stand up for all these poor defenceless women. Or maybe she's just very insecure in herself and thinks all women must be as pathetic as her.

[jp761]

Can someone clarify what differentiates replying from baiting? I've been accused of baiting and I don't quite understand how that works on this thread that is specifically for discussing things posted on DS.

Baiting in this thread. Err no, due to the fact that almost anything goes here, and everyone knows that.

[NastyNickers]

I had a few posts removed today from muggins and hobbit. Work in progress.

That's not quite true is it

you may have alerted but the mods clearly went back to the post that caused the issues, you know the one, the one where you asked Muggins what she did to deserve an act of violence against her property, that was the first post removed - I certainly didn't receive an email to say posts had been removed, so I doubt Muggins did either

but carrry on alerting because the irony of you causing your own ban next time will be delicious


edit - and let's remember who 'started' this conversation before you go all weepy about your victim status

Which thread?

The car in the swimming pool one, the posts are gone (I made 2)

Muggins posted - My ex-husband went to the effort of snapping every single LP I had in half before giving them back to me (I had over 150 of them!).

https://forums.digitalspy.com/discussio ... t_87963778

JRA asked what she had done to deserve that, or said she must have deserved it, that was the first post the mods deleted

he probably has screen grabs

I remember now. The actual wording to muggins was 'what did you do to piss your husband off so much .....'. The victim blaming thing came from another thread (*). So all alomg hobbit has been misquoting me and I've got sucked into it.

(*) The jail time that is.

HF did you a favour misquoting you, because that wording is even worse.
I don't know how you can claim that that isn't an accusation with a straight face. Or how you can believe that this totally gets you off the hook.

[Vam]

Can someone clarify what differentiates replying from baiting? I've been accused of baiting and I don't quite understand how that works on this thread that is specifically for discussing things posted on DS.

That’s easy to answer

If the person who sees you replying doesn’t like you, then you’re not ‘replying’; you’re ‘baiting’.

By the same logic, a person who insists on remaining hidden at all times will probably be someone that’s obsessively determined to ‘out’ your other (imagined) username/s.

Agreeing with someone’s post, or just having a bit of a laugh in passing, automatically makes you a ‘manipulative ass kisser’.

Also, a sharply-worded response to someone who’s uppity with you, automatically means you’re having a ‘meltdown’.

And I truly believe that anyone who keeps babbling about your (imagined) ‘anger issues’, is seething with impotent rage themselves.

Gotta love Guesty (& jra) logic!

[Guest]

Can someone clarify what differentiates replying from baiting? I've been accused of baiting and I don't quite understand how that works on this thread that is specifically for discussing things posted on DS.

That’s easy to answer

If the person who sees you replying doesn’t like you, then you’re not ‘replying’; you’re ‘baiting’.

By the same logic, a person who insists on remaining hidden at all times will probably be someone that’s obsessively determined to ‘out’ your other (imagined) username/s.

Agreeing with someone’s post, or just having a bit of a laugh in passing, automatically makes you a ‘manipulative ass kisser’.

Also, a sharply-worded response to someone who’s uppity with you, automatically means you’re having a ‘meltdown’.

And I truly believe that anyone who keeps babbling about your (imagined) ‘anger issues’, is seething with impotent rage themselves.

Gotta love Guesty (& jra) logic!

You forgot to add that any disagreement or challenge to you personally can only be for one or more of the above and you can and will lose your shit which will/should not reflect on you.

[Guest]

Can someone clarify what differentiates replying from baiting? I've been accused of baiting and I don't quite understand how that works on this thread that is specifically for discussing things posted on DS.

That’s easy to answer

If the person who sees you replying doesn’t like you, then you’re not ‘replying’; you’re ‘baiting’.

By the same logic, a person who insists on remaining hidden at all times will probably be someone that’s obsessively determined to ‘out’ your other (imagined) username/s.

Agreeing with someone’s post, or just having a bit of a laugh in passing, automatically makes you a ‘manipulative ass kisser’.

Also, a sharply-worded response to someone who’s uppity with you, automatically means you’re having a ‘meltdown’.

And I truly believe that anyone who keeps babbling about your (imagined) ‘anger issues’, is seething with impotent rage themselves.

Gotta love Guesty (& jra) logic!

canucklehead, vam using jra's name is baiting. no need for it & just designed to rile him.

[Guest]

I'm hearing from a friend in the know that DS lost more ad revenue this year than at any other point during its existence. The revamp has clearly failed. I wonder what happens next? do you think one day it might just cease to exist?