Prepago al Maximo

[Zon]

allegorical interpretation is an approach assuming that the authors of a text (e.g., the Bible) intended something other than what is literally expressed. The method has its origins in both Greek thought (who tried to avoid the literal interpretations of ancient Greek myths) and in the rabbinical schools of the Land of Israel. Most notably of pre-Christian authors Philo of Alexandria expressly refers to its use by his predecessors and uses it himself to discover indications of different doctrines of philosophy in the stories of the Pentateuch. The traces of allegorical and typological interpretation can be found later in the New Testament but are further developed in the Epistle of Barnabas and especially by Origen.

I think it is best to just post on the fly, without research, spelling corrections, ect...   THIS IS NOT SUPPOSED TO BE WORK (not really even fun)!  HAHAHA     So, I just don't try that hard.   If I make a spelling error, no biggie.   When I used the term Allegorical evidence ... I MEANT the general consensus produced by all the trip reports and third party experiences archived here (although you are argumentative in my case, I think, intellectually, you already knew that)Now, you may elect to begin to correct my spelling and grammar, WHEN ALL THAT MATTERS - if anything - is this:

"1, ME A WIFEHUNTER HATER: Rather than presume, guess, or claim, let me tell you EXACTLY what I think of "wifehunters" in Colombia: 70% are hapless, and are emotionally and physically needy, and they are searching - in most cases desperately - to fill voids in their life that they can not fill in their own home town.  Do you have a different perspective?  Is this not true?   I have already posted an enormous amount of allegorical evidence to support this observation. These boards are full of it.   Perhaps one would want to argue that the ratio is 50 % -  50%  - but the general gist is flat out true. Does that insult you / or anybody else here?

That leaves 30% - 20% that are men seeking the best life choices for themselves. While there are many train wrecks, there are other examples of a Colombiana who is a judge, or doctor (not poor, or desperate), meeting a similarly successful American man, in their own general league, and live happily ever after. "

So, you have littered up this thread to tell me how arrogant I am, and how illogical I am, and how unworthy my points are.  You are a sensitive little lily that gets insulted ... presumably because of your contempt for me and/or you place yourself in the group of BOZO GRINGOS I am reference from time to time. I GET IT (and by this point you should too). One more time, do you accept the "gist" or essence of the text in red, or not?  After all this time of objecting to me, please have the courage to simply define yourself as clearly as I have done.

[Fuzzyone]

I think it is best to just post on the fly, without research, spelling corrections, ect...   THIS IS NOT SUPPOSED TO BE WORK (not really even fun)!  HAHAHA     So, I just don't try that hard.   If I make a spelling error, no biggie.   When I used the term Allegorical evidence ... I MEANT the general consensus produced by all the trip reports and third party experiences archived here (although you are argumentative in my case, I think, intellectually, you already knew that)Now, you may elect to begin to correct my spelling and grammar, WHEN ALL THAT MATTERS - if anything - is this:

"1, ME A WIFEHUNTER HATER: Rather than presume, guess, or claim, let me tell you EXACTLY what I think of "wifehunters" in Colombia: 70% are hapless, and are emotionally and physically needy, and they are searching - in most cases desperately - to fill voids in their life that they can not fill in their own home town.  Do you have a different perspective?  Is this not true?   I have already posted an enormous amount of allegorical evidence to support this observation. These boards are full of it.   Perhaps one would want to argue that the ratio is 50 % -  50%  - but the general gist is flat out true. Does that insult you / or anybody else here?

That leaves 30% - 20% that are men seeking the best life choices for themselves. While there are many train wrecks, there are other examples of a Colombiana who is a judge, or doctor (not poor, or desperate), meeting a similarly successful American man, in their own general league, and live happily ever after. "

So, you have littered up this thread to tell me how arrogant I am, and how illogical I am, and how unworthy my points are.  You are a sensitive little lily that gets insulted ... presumably because of your contempt for me and/or you place yourself in the group of BOZO GRINGOS I am reference from time to time. I GET IT (and by this point you should too). One more time, do you accept the "gist" or essence of the text in red, or not?  After all this time of objecting to me, please have the courage to simply define yourself as clearly as I have done.

   I would like to see your facts if you are going to make such a blanket statement back it up by facts. I really do not think you get it and never will!

[Zon]

   I would like to see your facts if you are going to make such a blanket statement back it up by facts. I really do not think you get it and never will!

Nope!  If you have already gone to Colombia and have not noticed that many gringos waddle off the airplane to meet their "novias" with whom they have never physically touched; if you have not seen that many gringos make their first dates the shopping mall and bring lotsa cash; if you have not noticed that many gringos contemplate a serious relationship without giving ANY NATURAL communication to occur; if you have not noticed that most women are slow, and avoid showing the gringo to their family; if you have not noticed that in social situations many Gringos appear to be growing a tail; if you have not noticed the many, many things that cause a real negative social stereotype with the Colombian people that have the most interaction with wife hunters ( translators, for example); then ...

I could write a ton of experience that support these claims and more.  But, if some guys don't want to / or can't see ... so be it.

And, again, this covers the MAJORITY - 70% ? -  of wifehunters, in my opinion.  That is the truth of it to me.  Some people may say 90%.  Researcher and Fuzzy seem to be offended and blind.   

That leaves a MINORITY  - 30% - of wife hunters who with the proper time and balance can multiply their options 1000 fold.

[Researcher]

  Oh you mean ANECDOTAL evidence. You see Maritime has got you pegged. You make some decent posts and then muck them up with gaffes like this! Some may find it irritating but I find it hilarious! HAHAHA!
 
Repoire and you meant rapport  HAHAHA! Res you're calling the kettle black.

  And I believe you are cross posting JimD. Besides I gave the spelling and grammer police (you) ample time to respond but you seem to only be monitoring me. Oh well, looks as though I have another STALKER  fan.

    Researcher

[Fuzzyone]

Nope!  If you have already gone to Colombia and have not noticed that many gringos waddle off the airplane to meet their "novias" with whom they have never physically touched; if you have not seen that many gringos make their first dates the shopping mall and bring lotsa cash; if you have not noticed that many gringos contemplate a serious relationship without giving ANY NATURAL communication to occur; if you have not noticed that most women are slow, and avoid showing the gringo to their family; if you have not noticed that in social situations many Gringos appear to be growing a tail; if you have not noticed the many, many things that cause a real negative social stereotype with the Colombian people that have the most interaction with wife hunters ( translators, for example); then ...

I could write a ton of experience that support these claims and more.  But, if some guys don't want to / or can't see ... so be it.

And, again, this covers the MAJORITY - 70% ? -  of wifehunters, in my opinion.  That is the truth of it to me.  Some people may say 90%.  Researcher and Fuzzy seem to be offended and blind.   

That leaves a MINORITY  - 30% - of wife hunters who with the proper time and balance can multiply their options 1000 fold.

   Again before making a B.S. statment as you have back it up because I happen to know plenty of men that have gone to Colombia that are normal and do not have any problems get married and have a good marriage not a fantastic marriage but a good one.


   Now I am going to point out to you that it really counts where you troll and who you hang out with. Hang out with whores and all you will see is the men you described. I am not offended I just want to see the facts which you will not give. I think it pretty much shows you are talking out your behind again.


   You really do not seem to clear the fog, you get angry and start making statements that makes members here really wonder if you are sound and of right mind. It is really too bad because you could be of great help to the newbies here but why are they going to listen to you when you accuse them all of being rejects here in the U.S. and desperate!

[Researcher]

 allegorical interpretation is an approach assuming that the authors of a text (e.g., the Bible) intended something other than what is literally expressed.
 

What does this have to do with using "allegorical EVIDENCE"? Are you saying the trip reports are a secret code that really means something else? How ridiculous!

 

I think it is best to just post on the fly, without research, spelling corrections, ect...   THIS IS NOT SUPPOSED TO BE WORK (not really even fun)!  HAHAHA     So, I just don't try that hard.   If I make a spelling error, no biggie.   When I used the term Allegorical evidence ... I MEANT the general consensus produced by all the trip reports and third party experiences archived here (although you are argumentative in my case, I think, intellectually, you already knew that)Now, you may elect to begin to correct my spelling and grammar, WHEN ALL THAT MATTERS - if anything - is this:[/font][/size]
 

Apparently you post without even thinking. Maybe you consider that "the natural way" but for those of us trying to understand what you write it stinks!
 
 

"1, ME A WIFEHUNTER HATER: Rather than presume, guess, or claim, let me tell you EXACTLY what I think of "wifehunters" in Colombia: 70% are hapless, and are emotionally and physically needy, and they are searching - in most cases desperately - to fill voids in their life that they can not fill in their own home town.  Do you have a different perspective?  Is this not true?   I have already posted an enormous amount of allegorical evidence to support this observation. These boards are full of it.   Perhaps one would want to argue that the ratio is 50 % -  50%  - but the general gist is flat out true. Does that insult you / or anybody else here?
That leaves 30% - 20% that are men seeking the best life choices for themselves. While there are many train wrecks, there are other examples of a Colombiana who is a judge, or doctor (not poor, or desperate), meeting a similarly successful American man, in their own general league, and live happily ever after. "

So, you have littered up this thread to tell me how arrogant I am, and how illogical I am, and how unworthy my points are.  You are a sensitive little lily that gets insulted ... presumably because of your contempt for me and/or you place yourself in the group of BOZO GRINGOS I am reference from time to time. I GET IT (and by this point you should too).
 

What an angry sounding post. If I didn't know better I'd say your sensitive feelings are smarting.

 

[/font]One more time, do you accept the "gist" or essence of the text in red, or not?  After all this time of objecting to me, please have the courage to simply define yourself as clearly as I have done.[/size]

You never define yourself clearly and if you haven't figured out my thoughts on your BS you probably never will.

[Researcher]

   Again before making a B.S. statment as you have back it up because I happen to know plenty of men that have gone to Colombia that are normal and do not have any problems get married and have a good marriage not a fantastic marriage but a good one.


   Now I am going to point out to you that it really counts where you troll and who you hang out with. Hang out with whores and all you will see is the men you described. I am not offended I just want to see the facts which you will not give. I think it pretty much shows you are talking out your behind again.


   You really do not seem to clear the fog, you get angry and start making statements that makes members here really wonder if you are sound and of right mind. It is really too bad because you could be of great help to the newbies here but why are they going to listen to you when you accuse them all of being rejects here in the U.S. and desperate!

    You are correct Fuzzy! All of Zon's proof has only to do with what he see's when out in public. I actually know guys who have married Colombianas and Zon's crap don't wash. What other conclusion would someone like zon reach other than the majority of people anywhere are losers! hahaha!

       Researcher

[Zon]

""Again before making a B.S. statment as you have back it up because I happen to know plenty of men that have gone to Colombia that are normal and do not have any problems get married and have a good marriage not a fantastic marriage but a good one."

Where did I say this was not so, or impossible.  What is being debated here is the presumption that I am anti-marriage anti-wifehunter  .... and that from those two positions, all my comments are slanted.   To which I responded in the red text above.  There is a gist to what I am saying = you either agree with it, or disagree with it.  There are degrees, but the lines are pretty well defined.   This  explains my outlook to wifehunters. (I have noticed that neither of you have engaged those points ... rather you have questions why, how, etc...   I think you both are smarter than that, but for some reason do not want to speak bluntly on the subject)

And, many of you think I am being mean, or arrogant, or whatever?  Few seem to associate with the 30 percent, and many associate with the 70 percent ... WHY?  In any case, I am not as much of an a$$hole as this debate would suggest.  I am only trying to develop a clear, consistent definition that some will agree with, and others will not.   I respect most of all those who make the most out of whatever God gave them.   A good attitude and effort and personality can overcome any other negative attribute - but that again is in the 40 percent minority.

So, at least you should know where I stand on marriage hunters by now. I do not think the entire group are fools, as often is claimed.  I am not against marriage either, and that too is often claimed.

[Fuzzyone]

""Again before making a B.S. statment as you have back it up because I happen to know plenty of men that have gone to Colombia that are normal and do not have any problems get married and have a good marriage not a fantastic marriage but a good one."

Where did I say this was not so, or impossible.  What is being debated here is the presumption that I am anti-marriage anti-wifehunter  .... and that from those two positions, all my comments are slanted.   To which I responded in the red text above.  There is a gist to what I am saying = you either agree with it, or disagree with it.  There are degrees, but the lines are pretty well defined.   This  explains my outlook to wifehunters. (I have noticed that neither of you have engaged those points ... rather you have questions why, how, etc...   I think you both are smarter than that, but for some reason do not want to speak bluntly on the subject)

And, many of you think I am being mean, or arrogant, or whatever?  Few seem to associate with the 30 percent, and many associate with the 70 percent ... WHY?  In any case, I am not as much of an a$$hole as this debate would suggest.  I am only trying to develop a clear, consistent definition that some will agree with, and others will not.   I respect most of all those who make the most out of whatever God gave them.   A good attitude and effort and personality can overcome any other negative attribute - but that again is in the 40 percent minority.

So, at least you should know where I stand on marriage hunters by now. I do not think the entire group are fools, as often is claimed.  I am not against marriage either, and that too is often claimed.

  Nice try of trying to talk your way out of a statement that you made NO ONE ELSE DID JUST YOU! Go back and read what you said and please do not try to edit it out now we have saved the post thank you. Anyway what are you really talking about except what you really think of the membership here.


  Your statements pretty much summed up what you think and please do not play anyone here as fools "the proof is in the pudding" !!!

[Fuzzyone]

""Again before making a B.S. statment as you have back it up because I happen to know plenty of men that have gone to Colombia that are normal and do not have any problems get married and have a good marriage not a fantastic marriage but a good one."

Where did I say this was not so, or impossible.  What is being debated here is the presumption that I am anti-marriage anti-wifehunter  .... and that from those two positions, all my comments are slanted.   To which I responded in the red text above.  There is a gist to what I am saying = you either agree with it, or disagree with it.  There are degrees, but the lines are pretty well defined.   This  explains my outlook to wifehunters. (I have noticed that neither of you have engaged those points ... rather you have questions why, how, etc...   I think you both are smarter than that, but for some reason do not want to speak bluntly on the subject)

And, many of you think I am being mean, or arrogant, or whatever?  Few seem to associate with the 30 percent, and many associate with the 70 percent ... WHY?  In any case, I am not as much of an a$$hole as this debate would suggest.  I am only trying to develop a clear, consistent definition that some will agree with, and others will not.   I respect most of all those who make the most out of whatever God gave them.   A good attitude and effort and personality can overcome any other negative attribute - but that again is in the 40 percent minority.

So, at least you should know where I stand on marriage hunters by now. I do not think the entire group are fools, as often is claimed.  I am not against marriage either, and that too is often claimed.

   One last thing before this desperate loser of a man hits the sack... oh by the way I have been married for what 7 and a half years to a sweet Colombian girl, I STILL HAVE NOT SEEN YOUR PROOF TO A VERY B.S. STATEMENT THAT YOU ARE TRYING TO WEASEL OUT OF!?

[Researcher]

   I have responded to zon's silly premise point by point and even proved how it was false in a post to Whitey. Ol' Zon is starting to play the victim now, same old song and dance. He makes some ridiculous claim that is proven BS or shows his true nature and he gets defensive.

    Don't get upset zon. Not everyone is going to agree with you.


          Researcher

   

[Researcher]

        Maybe zon didn't read my posts where I responded to his comments but his recent "protests" have prompted me to think about the possibility that maybe others don't get what I have been getting at. So I have decided to take zon's premise and break it down into what he is saying and why I disagree. Here is a statement that sums up zon's premise:

 

 1, ME A WIFEHUNTER HATER: Rather than presume, guess, or claim, let me tell you EXACTLY what I think of "wifehunters" in Colombia: 70% are hapless, and are emotionally and physically needy, and they are searching - in most cases desperately - to fill voids in their life that they can not fill in their own home town.
 

      First the claim is made that 70% of "wifehunters" are hapless and emotionally and physically needy.

      Hapless means unfortunate or unlucky. In some cases it even means wretched but I'll give the benefit of the doubt here and say unfortunate. To me this is a term used for someone that life hasn't been kind to. One could even use the word "loser" but again I'll give the benefit of doubt and go with unfortunate.

      Emotionally needy actually means someone who needs people to tell them often that they are liked or that they are doing well. Constant reinforcement is necessary to keep their ego from collapsing but for some reason in this premise it is used to mean someone who is looking to fill a "void" in their life.

     Physically needy seems to mean someone who can't find anyone to have sex with them. Again, I'm going to say this is linked to filling a "void" in thier life.(No pun intended).

      Now according to the premise the majority of men who go to Colombia to find a mate are single unfortunate and lonely guys who can't find a suitable female in their own hometown. I'll stop there because how many single guys does this describe? Not just the "wifehunters" who travel to Colombia but anywhere?

    So the first reason I don't like this premise is that it takes some negative sounding attributes that can apply to single men in general and insinuates this is the reason the "70%" of wife hunters travel to Colombia. I would say there are many lonely guys out there and the smart ones travel outside the US to find a wife. I didn't use the term "unfortunate" because I feel many single guys can't find a suitable female in their hometown simply because of the social climate in the US. They aren't lonely because they are unfortunate but because of the situation: No single women available that would make a good spouse.

     Next the premise says the "70%" are desperately searching to "fill a void" in their life. Why? because they want to settle down and get married? I don't see it that way. It is perfectly normal to want to be in a relationship. Just because someone is looking for a mate doesn't mean they are "desperately searching to fill a void". It also doesn't make someone emotionally and physically needy, it is perfectly normal. There is absolutely nothing wrong with putting yourself out there if you are single and looking. If you are sitting around waiting for Mr or Miss Right to come along...good luck!

    The second reason I don't like this premise is that it assumes anyone who actively seeks to find a mate is only trying to "fill a void" in their life. How can anyone determine someone's motives from simply observing them?

     Next is this part of the premise:

 

 That leaves 30% - 20% that are men seeking the best life choices for themselves. While there are many train wrecks, there are other examples of a Colombiana who is a judge, or doctor (not poor, or desperate), meeting a similarly successful American man, in their own general league, and live happily ever after.
 

         Best life choices meaning what? If they are looking for a mate they are making the same life choices as all wife hunters: finding a mate. But if you look at the next sentence is states that there are women in Colombia who aren't "poor or desperate" train wrecks.

       Reason three for not liking this premise is it assumes poor Colombianas are 1) desperate and 2) train wrecks(I'm thinking emotionally here). I have met many, many, many women in many places around the world and I have to say being poor doesn't automatically mean any woman is desperate or a train wreck. I find this assumption to be an arrogant judgement and simply not true.

      The premise also states there are Colombianas who are a judge or a doctor(college educated professionals) who meet a successful American man in their own league(I'm thinking looks here) and live happily ever after.

      Fourth reason I don't like this premise. It assumes the keys to living "happily ever after"(having a successful relationship) are tied to level of education, money and looks. I don't believe these things even help in having a successful relationship. In my life I was married to a highly educated, attractive woman who made good money and she was a huge train wreck. She hid it well too. After we were married I found out she had more emotional problems than most people I have ever met. Having an education doesn't mean anyone is emotionally stable. I know because I have worked with and known educated people all of my adult life and when it comes to relationships it doesn't mean squat! Same goes for money and same goes for looks. Here is a big secret: It is what is inside a person that counts!
And when it comes to relationships it is all about human connection and how you relate to one another.

        So this premise 1) applies negatively sounding made up attributes to "wifehunters" in Colombia that could be applied to many single men. 2) It assumes people who actively seek a mate are looking to "fill a void". 3) It assumes poor women are only desperate emotional train wrecks. 4) It assumes the keys to having a successful relationship are tied to education, money and looks.     

       This premise is made up of false and arrogant assumptions and based on simply observing people. Sounds like a classic example of judging a book by it's cover.


             Researcher
       

           

           

[Zon]

        So this premise 1) applies negatively sounding made up attributes to "wifehunters" in Colombia that could be applied to many single men. 2) It assumes people who actively seek a mate are looking to "fill a void". 3) It assumes poor women are only desperate emotional train wrecks. 4) It assumes the keys to having a successful relationship are tied to education, money and looks.     

       This premise is made up of false and arrogant assumptions and based on simply observing people. Sounds like a classic example of judging a book by it's cover.            Researcher

Very well written, and I can understand your disagreement.

You do not like, or agree with my TONE and MANNER mostly.  Further, you disagree with other inferences containted in my statement.  There is a clear gist, or essence to that which I have written.  You disagree with it. NO PROBLEM WITH  ME.  Now you know where I stand - I do not think ALL wife hunters are hapless, and emotional and physically needy.  I am not anti marriage.  UNIVERSAL AGREEMENT IS NOT REQUIRED.

Within my main point contains inferences that reveal my red flags, and preferences - you disagree with these too.    I stated in my original post that GENERALIZATIONS INFLAME - that is one of the side effects of using them

[Micky]

Four passengers on a airplane that had engine problems and was going to crash.  There were only three parachutes.
 
One of the worlds wealthiest men.
A man who was a genius.
A priest.
A teenage boy.
 
The wealthy man said,  "The world needs my money,  business leadership and investments,  I have to live."  He grabbed a pack and jumped.
 
The genius said,  "I am one of the smartest men alive,  the world needs my thoughts,  ideas and answers,  I have to live."  He takes a pack and jumps.
 
The priest turns to the young man and says,  "I am old and have had a good life,  you are young and have many good years ahead of you.  You take the last parachute and go."
 
The young man says to the priest,  "Thanks padre,  but we have two parachutes,  the genius took my backpack."
　
 
Micky 
 　

[Researcher]

Very well written, and I can understand your disagreement.

You do not like, or agree with my TONE and MANNER mostly.  Further, you disagree with other inferences containted in my statement.  There is a clear gist, or essence to that which I have written.  You disagree with it. NO PROBLEM WITH  ME.  Now you know where I stand - I do not think ALL wife hunters are hapless, and emotional and physically needy.  I am not anti marriage.  UNIVERSAL AGREEMENT IS NOT REQUIRED.

Within my main point contains inferences that reveal my red flags, and preferences - you disagree with these too.    I stated in my original post that GENERALIZATIONS INFLAME - that is one of the side effects of using them

        Tone and manner mostly? You must not have gotten the "gist" of my post. Given that your premise is based mostly on observation and assumption the likelyhood of it matching up with reality in the least is very slim. Reading comprehension must not be your strongest ability.


     Researcher

[Zon]

Tone and manner mostly? You must not have gotten the "gist" of my post. Given that your premise is based mostly on observation and assumption the likelyhood of it matching up with reality in the least is very slim. Reading comprehension must not be your strongest ability.

I am going to stay with this - *** - until you either 1, agree with the gist, the essence of the text in red; or 2, state your counter position in one clear sentence.

To say that one ought know by the body of your posts, or to ramble on about how difficult it would be to understand the "neediness" of another, side steps the point!   It is really pretty clear.   You have stated, and scoffed, and ridiculed at every chance you get to say that I am anti - wife hunter and anti - marriage.  I laid out MY OUTLOOK in red text.  All I know about YOUR OUTLOOK is that you do not accept mine.  hahaha  You are a proflie in courage!

And to want facts on such things?  Come on, that is like wanting a Consumer Report for Mail Order Brides - The 2011 Buyers Survey.  You are argumentative for the purpose of argument only

[Fuzzyone]

I am going to stay with this - you little prick - until you either 1, agree with the gist, the essence of the text in red; or 2, state your counter position in one clear sentence.

To say that one ought know by the body of your posts, or to ramble on about how difficult it would be to understand the "neediness" of another, side steps the point!   It is really pretty clear.   You have stated, and scoffed, and ridiculed at every chance you get to say that I am anti - wife hunter and anti - marriage.  I laid out MY OUTLOOK in red text.  All I know about YOUR OUTLOOK is that you do not accept mine.  hahaha  You are a proflie in courage!

And to want facts on such things?  Come on, that is like wanting a Consumer Report for Mail Order Brides - The 2011 Buyers Survey.  You are argumentative for the purpose of argument only

  What I find most interesting is that you cried and complained about several of us attacking you and how many men would not post here because of us. Now you revert to form by calling names why? No one here has called you anything have they? Everyone here has only called you on your statements that you have made asking for facts which you refuse to supply because you have none.
 
  In fact you try to down play your statements by stating it really is no big deal or some other B.S. be honest with yourself for once in your life.

[Researcher]

I am going to stay with this - you little prick - until you either 1, agree with the gist, the essence of the text in red; or 2, state your counter position in one clear sentence.
 

    Staying with this? hahaha! When are you going to start? I have responded to your nonsense by laying out how and why your premise is such nonsense and you barely comment. Wake me when you come up with something the least bit substantial.

 

To say that one ought know by the body of your posts, or to ramble on about how difficult it would be to understand the "neediness" of another, side steps the point!   It is really pretty clear.   You have stated, and scoffed, and ridiculed at every chance you get to say that I am anti - wife hunter and anti - marriage.  I laid out MY OUTLOOK in red text.  All I know about YOUR OUTLOOK is that you do not accept mine.  hahaha  You are a proflie in courage!
 

     I took your heaping pile of doggie poo premise and exposed it for what it is and now you are only pissing in the wind trying to regain some dignity. That is all. HAHAHA!

     You claim you "laid out" your outlook when all you did was change the font color of the same nonsense you wrote in another post. Recycling the same crap over and over doesn't take much courage. Respond to my posts like a grown man and stop repeating the same old crap!

 

And to want facts on such things?  Come on, that is like wanting a Consumer Report for Mail Order Brides - The 2011 Buyers Survey.  You are argumentative for the purpose of argument only

      Where did I want facts? Read and understand for once and stop assuming. You seem to assume alot without much to go on and often you are WRONG.

[Ray]

 
 
     
 
 
 
 

[Zon]

Yes Ray, very boring.  This will be the last time I respond to these two on these subjects - PROMISE

  What I find most interesting is that you cried and complained about several of us attacking you and how many men would not post here because of us. Now you revert to form by calling names why? No one here has called you anything have they?

My complaint was not about name calling.  Clearly, you guys think I am a pig.  The fact that i am here shows I care not.   My complaint was in the repetition, thread killing.  My complaint was that there is a very narrow scope of dialogue that some want to maintain here. CERTIANLY stops participation.  Once again, here is evidence.

If a new person enters and sees this type of stupid, senseless bickering, I doubt he is likely to return. But, I it seems you have different take on this - big surprise hahaha

*** Watch the personal attacks.  No "cute" terms of endearment.  -Mod Bob

[Fuzzyone]

Yes Ray, very boring.  This will be the last time I respond to these two on these subjects - PROMISE

My complaint was not about name calling.  Clearly, you guys think I am a pig.  The fact that i am here shows I care not.   My complaint was in the repetition, thread killing.  My complaint was that there is a very narrow scope of dialogue that some want to maintain here. CERTIANLY stops participation.  Once again, here is evidence.

If a new person enters and sees this type of stupid, senseless bickering, I doubt he is likely to return. But, I it seems you have different take on this - big surprise hahaha

PS - "Little Prick" is a term of endearment I use for Researcher.  After years of this kind of give and take, it is earned.

   Once again poor Zon you stepped into the lion's den and cannot believe you got bit. What is it with you? All you have to do is show us where you came up with such supposed facts to back up your statements but you refuse because you already know you are talking out your @ss like always.


   If you think I was going to sit still while you once again parade around supposed facts that you cannot back up then big surprise!  You started the bickering but now it is everyone else but you. You answer every post half way that way you can just keep it going and try to write a fancy post with words you cannnot spell correctly I think you are in that what you claimed as 70% group sad!

[JimD]

 "My complaint was that there is a very narrow scope of dialogue that some want to maintain here."
 
I'd say Zon is pretty accurate with this one.

[Ray]

   Once again poor Zon you stepped into the lion's den and cannot believe you got bit. What is it with you? All you have to do is show us where you came up with such supposed facts to back up your statements but you refuse because you already know you are talking out your @ss like always.


   If you think I was going to sit still while you once again parade around supposed facts that you cannot back up then big surprise!  You started the bickering but now it is everyone else but you. You answer every post half way that way you can just keep it going and try to write a fancy post with words you cannnot spell correctly I think you are in that what you claimed as 70% group sad!

 
  Uh, excuse me, but "cannnot" is not spelled correctly… 
 
 
 
ROFLMAO!
 
Ray
 
 

[JimD]

Who cares? Zon has already said several times that he just shoots from the hip when spelling. Researcher too opts for phonetic spelling sometimes and we all slip up myself included. I'd wager this site isn't overloaded with doctoral candidates so like I said, who cares?

[Researcher]

Yes Ray, very boring.  This will be the last time I respond to these two on these subjects - PROMISE
 

     Weak responses, no answers to my posts and now creating an excuse to leave.

     That's it zon run away with your tail tucked between your legs once again! hahaha!

       Researcher