deadmau5 vs A guy called gerald
Re: deadmau5 vs A guy called gerald
hahaha thats what i thought also. deccard is someone else though.
Re: deadmau5 vs A guy called gerald
is Peter ok?
Re: deadmau5 vs A guy called gerald
aww sweet. you´re such a cool dude on the internet. always the lolz on your side.breton wrote:Peter, is that you?deccard wrote:jeff is a dck for putting a part of a private conversation online to discredit someone. works for the stupid part of the net.
techno made me do it
-
- mnml moderator
- Posts: 2561
- Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2005 5:30 pm
- Location: Est0n14
Re: deadmau5 vs A guy called gerald
well he says he will at least 3 times during the "conversation"...deccard wrote:jeff is a dck for putting a part of a private conversation online to discredit someone. works for the stupid part of the net.
Actually I'd do the same - this's just absolutely surreal bs.
I mean the man clearly discredits himself doesn't he now? If your not comfortable getting your bs into the open then don't bs.
we are all atomic and subatomic particles and we are all wireless...
Re: deadmau5 vs A guy called gerald
well because he says it doesnt make it right. putting private stuff in public is a weak and shortsighted thing to do. you dont know the whole story between those two and the whole conversation etc...he can block him immediatley, sue him or well...just be an asshole himself and presenting a part of it to the public and let the cybermob rule. especially if it´s surreal bullshit. very weak and immature to handle it that way.Robot Criminal wrote:well he says he will at least 3 times during the "conversation"...deccard wrote:jeff is a dck for putting a part of a private conversation online to discredit someone. works for the stupid part of the net.
Actually I'd do the same - this's just absolutely surreal bs.
I mean the man clearly discredits himself doesn't he now? If your not comfortable getting your bs into the open then don't bs.
techno made me do it
Re: deadmau5 vs A guy called gerald
It's 'weak and immature' to insult people (on facebook).deccard wrote:well because he says it doesnt make it right. putting private stuff in public is a weak and shortsighted thing to do. you dont know the whole story between those two and the whole conversation etc...he can block him immediatley, sue him or well...just be an asshole himself and presenting a part of it to the public and let the cybermob rule. especially if it´s surreal bullshit. very weak and immature to handle it that way.Robot Criminal wrote:well he says he will at least 3 times during the "conversation"...deccard wrote:jeff is a dck for putting a part of a private conversation online to discredit someone. works for the stupid part of the net.
Actually I'd do the same - this's just absolutely surreal bs.
I mean the man clearly discredits himself doesn't he now? If your not comfortable getting your bs into the open then don't bs.
It's 'weak and immature' to threaten people (on facebook).
It seems to me that your defence of him is based on the precept that it's ok to be a twat when nobody sees you. When it's 'private'.
It's not.
Twats should be exposed. For everyone who does wicked things hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his works should be exposed. (John 3:20)
Let me ask you this, is it ok if a man beats his wife when nobody can see them? Is it a 'weak and shortsighted' thing to do to expose such a person?
Is it ok if a catholic priest molests a young boy when nobody can see them? Is it a 'weak and shortsighted' thing to do to expose such a person?
Re: deadmau5 vs A guy called gerald
you totally dont get the point. i never defended grummichs bullshit. i bet he was drunk or on something and it´s so whack its funny again. but it´s just a click to turn some annoying idiot off on facebook (and comparing this with physical violence and christian bible bullshit also cries out for a double facepalm...)breton wrote:It's 'weak and immature' to insult people (on facebook).deccard wrote:well because he says it doesnt make it right. putting private stuff in public is a weak and shortsighted thing to do. you dont know the whole story between those two and the whole conversation etc...he can block him immediatley, sue him or well...just be an asshole himself and presenting a part of it to the public and let the cybermob rule. especially if it´s surreal bullshit. very weak and immature to handle it that way.Robot Criminal wrote:well he says he will at least 3 times during the "conversation"...deccard wrote:jeff is a dck for putting a part of a private conversation online to discredit someone. works for the stupid part of the net.
Actually I'd do the same - this's just absolutely surreal bs.
I mean the man clearly discredits himself doesn't he now? If your not comfortable getting your bs into the open then don't bs.
It's 'weak and immature' to threaten people (on facebook).
It seems to me that your defence of him is based on the precept that it's ok to be a twat when nobody sees you. When it's 'private'.
It's not.
Twats should be exposed. For everyone who does wicked things hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his works should be exposed. (John 3:20)
Let me ask you this, is it ok if a man beats his wife when nobody can see them? Is it a 'weak and shortsighted' thing to do to expose such a person?
Is it ok if a catholic priest molests a young boy when nobody can see them? Is it a 'weak and shortsighted' thing to do to expose such a person?
techno made me do it