>>1 Jesus I am retarded. Ok just because I'm mentally deficient doesn't mean a "large number" of others here are.

I'm answering my own post here, which was meant to be an answer to Alex's post on the Flame Thread there.

Please stop you guys we love Cracky why do we have to fight?
I'm

>>2
Well, I think you refute your own claim that this is a "friendly and funny board" by feeling you have to describe the thread above as a "Flame Thread".

My own intention, in responding to someone's posting a photo of me and suggesting that people deface it by posting a NUDE photo and saying "deface this, it's even uglier", was certainly not to "flame" anyone. Rather, it was to defuse a gathering flame war through, indeed, "friendliness and funniness".

But I think the following posts - which ARE indeed "flame posts" - indicate how little "friendliness and funniness" is appreciated or even understood in this "community". People see gentle self-mockery just as an "in" which allows them to launch into decidedly UN-gentle mockery of the person brave enough to mock themselves.

Give it a little longer than the "week" you've been here. You'll see.

Although, of course, I'd be absolutely delighted to be proven wrong.

>>3 Well let's put it this way. There was no fighting in here all week until you showed up.

Obviously you're blaming this fact on "everyone else."

Read the week's posts for yourself- "everyone else" has indeed been friendly.

For example I am a new person at the board and I've been made to feel very welcome.

Please try to ignore attacks on yourself, however unjustified you find them, and try to avoid attacking others?

I'm asking, not telling.

Best regards to you.

>>1

Now you know why CH is just about dead - Alex was, unfortunately, one of the moderators there. Jeff seen sense (for once)and took his mod powers away.
It never took me long, when I was new, to cross swords with Alex, and for him to earn my emnity. Happens to us all.

I guess this is you proved your worth, now. Welcome aboard, anon.

>>5 Thank you for that internets history, and the welcome as well. When I arrived here I saw that "lurk moar" is the advice for new people. I have to say I've been lurking my head off, and I felt that thrill of finding a "lost treasure" when I dug up an old 4chan archive thread by Gackto that had a few uncommons I hadn't seen before.

>>4
Well, if you're "asking", then listen to the answer.

And please don't adopt this "Please try to understand that this is your own fault" attitude - which is INFINITELY more condescending than any attitude that I adopt - until you have understood the answer.

I think anybody who has been here MORE than your "week or so" will be bound to admit - though there's a fat chance that they WILL admit it, since nobody admits the truth on the Internet - that attacks are going to be made on me WHATEVER I post, as soon as a post is recognized to be by me at all (and a post of mine is ALWAYS immediately recognizable.

Please, if you're going to adopt the patronizing tone you do adopt, look at the SPECIFIC thread you intended to post in, and engage with its SPECIFIC details. It BEGAN with an attack on me. I then tried to DEFUSE this attack with a couple of extremely self-effacing, self-critical, self-mocking posts that the one or two people of good will on here (Schwill, for example) took in the spirit they were intended in and had a good, gentle, human laugh at.

Then, inevitably, the tide of "fuck off, you're not wanted, we hate you, blah blah blah".

The "rights and wrongs" here, if you like, are a bit like the "rights and wrongs" of the situation in a bar in deepest Alabama in the 50s. The good-ol'-boy regulars at the bar are surely friendly as hell to one another. If a black guy wanders in there one day, though, there's no question but that he'll get spat on, beaten unconscious and thrown out in the gutter.

There's even a sort of SENSE to describing a black guy who KEEPS COMING BACK to that bar as a guy intent on "causing trouble".

But on the other hand there's also something deeply morally off about someone who would start lecturing that black guy in the condescending tone that you have been lecturing me in, saying "Everyone is very friendly here...Why do you insist on coming in and spoiling the friendliness?"

In other words: You want to hang out with a bunch of vicious vindictive idiot bullies and slap each other on the back and tell each other what great guys you are? Well, that's your right, maybe. But just cut out the 'no animosity' bullshit, eh?

>>7
So, what's your excuse?

Why do you want to hang out with a bunch of vicious vindictive idiot bullies you know are going to react negatively at anything you post?

>>7
Stand well back! I'll hit it with a shovel!

>>5
Also, now you're part of the ".71 love-in" and general "group hug", you might want to consider just how much sense the argument of THIS post makes:

(i) Crackyhouse was a passably active board on which Alex Reynolds posted and which, for a while, he moderated.

(ii) His activity and moderation was made well-nigh impossible by people throwing tantrums, spamming, and screaming endlessly over and over: "We want to post about Cracky but we can't because Alex Reynolds keeps derailing everything we post about Cracky and deleting it."

(iii) Alex Reynolds gets sick of it, steps down as moderator, and ceases to post on Crackyhouse.

(iv) Crackyhouse then becomes a board with Cracky-content approximately equal to zero, featuring little except Merovin boasting about how many drugs he takes and a gay Spanish newfag showing everyone his dildoes.

My best regards to YOU, sir. You'll certainly need them in this snake-pit of absurd dishonesty and distortion.

>>8

>>"Alex"

Really quite IRRITATING how you seem to need cap cocks to emphasize your points.

>>10

CH is a shithole for necrophiliacs, teen camwhores and namefags, that's why it's dead.

>>9

>>14

lol

AHAHa what a great picture

>>14

Take this punk down.

>>1
Soooo, hate hime yet ? Don't worry about it; it's unnatural not to.
If you still have doubts and think this might be just a case of "the group" piling up on "the new guy", just read back a few pages to when he first appeared (right after he, uhm, "stepped down" as a moderator).
There's really no such thing as "the group" in here, but each and everyone dislikes that guy individually, mainly because of his unprecedented levels of grand douchery.
But really, it's just that none of us can stand him (which is remarkable because normally just about anybody can find acceptance here; it's a church after all).

>as soon as a post is recognized to be by me at all (and a post of mine is ALWAYS immediately recognizable.

That's what you still refuse to understand, that dynamic makes it that everyone of your posts is an affront to all those of us who buried their names and tripcodes when the nukes fell.

Before the nukes, there was a banner on top of the page, it said "Perpetuating the circlejerk of drama".

And drama there was, it became so bad that it was more about tripfag drama than it was about Cracky, kinda like CH was like for the last few years.

And then the nukes fell. The drama was incinerated and the tripfags brought their drama to wish, then to Crackyhouse.

Some of us, the very few faithful left still came here, we started over and it was quiet, and it was good.

This is where we are coming from. This is the tradition. I went to wish and CH, I perpetuated the circlejerk of drama there, but here, the banner is down, and I am but another anonymonk in this mad monastery.

Your posts here, Alex, are an insult to this tradition, even before you start insulting all Crackyfags wholesale, except for those elusive silent Alex supporters.

Get the fuck out of my church if you cant take your hat off or cant keep your pants on.

It's actually the least you could do

>>17 heh.. "grand douchery"

Hello, I am the Grand Douche of Cracky board.

Nope I don't hate him, I gave up hating people on the internets because it's not worth the effort. This guy's not worth hating.

However, I do appreciate your information, thank you.

On an individual level no of course I don't like him. But I'd never give him the satisfaction of hating him. It is a Church, like you said.

A mighty fine Church too.

>>19
Crikey - yeah, unfortunately, that was CrIKEy - you people really do at least provide a bit of amusement and instruction in the way of laughably shameless hypocrisy.

I don't suppose you're even AWARE, though, how laughably self-contradictory your posts ALL are.

Just look at the last three. They all begin by insisting that there is no "uniformity of opinion" here - and end, in case you haven't noticed, by expressing exactly the same opinion as the previous poster:

"Nobody told me to hate him - but I hate him."

"I'm just part of the anonymous group mind and therefore don't hate anybody - but I hate him."

"I don't hate him, he's really not worth hating - although I DO hate him, of course."

What YOU "refuse to understand", you wildly verbally flailing idiots, is that I have nothing at all to do with the "drama" that you keep referring to as part of your pathetic little delusionally overblown "history".

The whole "circle jerk" thing, as far as I can glean, was some sort of insane neurotic rivalry about who was to be the bull-goose stalker, or bull-goose composer of clumsy, tasteless, pseudo-biblical Crackypasta, or bull-goose engager in some other sad and creepy activity that I have never had any interest in and never will.

I was drawn into this whole thing purely by chance because of a very normal, conventional sexual interest in an equally conventionally attractive 20-year-old girl whom I have never had any need to "stalk" because she's been entirely complicit and consenting in the whole thing all along.

The fact that what sustains her complicity and consent is, yes, very largely MONEY does, it is true, lend a hue of comedy and grotesquerie to the whole thing - and this element of ridiculousness and grotesquerie is, I suppose, the one thing that makes me think that there might be ANY basis at all on which a relatively normal individual like myself might be able to communicate and discuss with seriously disturbed and disturbing nutballs like yourselves.

The ONLY dignified and humanly decent way to deal with MY situation OR yours is to treat it with IRONY and HUMOUR, and to learn to laugh loud and long at ourselves. Pompous, ridiculous talk about a "tradition", and a "church", and "monks" and such bullshit is only casting a veil of smirking, self-satisfied vanity over what amounts, really, to a set of sad and obnoxious activities which Cracky is more than a hundred times justified in abhorring and wishing to see stopped.

One way of stopping it is learning to turn it all into self-mocking laughter - and it's the fact that I choose to deal with the tragedy of failed love and sexuality in a way that you're all far too narcissistic and stubbornly egotistical to try to deal with it that makes you hate me so much.

An opposite but analogous principle applies here, though, to the one recommended to Lenny Caution in Jean-Luc Godard's "Alphaville". There, the clue was: "There's hope for those who can still cry." Here, it's: "There's hope for those who can laugh."

My regards and best wishes to those - like Schwill and the guy who picked up on the Bill Grundy / Sex Pistols dialogue - who, in the past 24 hours or so, have proven themselves intact enough to recognize a joke as a joke.

YOU I'll see "on the other side".

Oh oh! Now look what you've done.

>>20 You really are a nasty little cunt, aren't you? All I've seen you do here is spit poison.

I can't imagine a person like you could be remotely happy about anything, anywhere, anytime.

Why not just do the rite thing?

>>20

>YOU I'll see "on the other side".

If you're going to make us all happy by becoming an hero, may I made a few recommendations?

>> Jesus we posted the an heroes at exactly the same time.

What were the odds?

Might be proof that it wrote a magical "make everyone wish I were dead" essay.

>>20

>The fact that what sustains her complicity and consent is, yes, very largely MONEY does, it is true, lend a hue of comedy and grotesquerie to the whole thing - and this element of ridiculousness and grotesquerie is, I suppose, the one thing that makes me think that there might be ANY basis at all on which a relatively normal individual like myself might be able to communicate and discuss with seriously disturbed and disturbing nutballs like yourselves.

How does paying some daft slapper $500PCM for her to taunt you over her boyfriends' video game collection make YOU 'normal', to the extent you refer to everyone else on this board as'seriously disturbed and disturbing nutballs'?

Hurry up and die you old cunt.

>>23
I think it's a pretty telling indication of how incapable you are of conceiving of a human life that would consist of anything ELSE but the sadism and bullying and pathetic attempts at self-aggrandizement that doubtless fill your days that you interpret my phrase "the other side" as HAVING to mean "the after-life".

All I meant by it was "the other side" of the swamp of general nastiness and pettiness that you people have got yourself bogged down in. HUMOUR alone leads out of and beyond this swamp - that is, not OUT OF life but INTO it.

I assure you I suffer from no suicidal urges at all, despite finding myself pretty much constantly at odds with the world around me, here and elsewhere.

I would be terrified to have to leave this world because I find an enormous amount to love in it: Nature, the beauty of women, the products of human genius, and - most importantly - myself.

I sincerely do hope that some of you can overcome your deep hatred of yourselves and your constant gnawing fear of everyone else and be as grateful for life as I am.yo

>>20
It was always coming to this you know...

You, posting what you later call a good natured joke but is really petty mockery of something that doesnt meet your approval, only to claim the role of the victim during the initial backlash until you, once again tell us just how much contempt and disdain you have for the Crackyverse and the Crackyfags.

You are here to amuse yourself at our expense and you'll come back to play the same tiresome little game.

And if you dont, I wont even think about it.

>>25
The "daft slapper" and I are rather fond of each other.

I won't drag her into this.

It's a case of what I've been saying, really. There's no love in the lives of people like you. No love for yourself, no trust, or hope of trust, in others. You'll never understand a word of what I'm talking about.

Let's leave it at that.

>>26

We were all getting quite jolly until you returned , Alex. The new guy was 100% right, you're bringing it all down upon yourself.

There is a proverb which says: 'When everyone calls you an ass, it is time to bray'.

Think about it. Everyone else on this board can't ALL be wrong, can they? One of the first things I said to you was that your attitude must have earned you several kickings IRL, but I now realise you've got no friends, no social life, so your opportunities for learning these valuable life lessons are reduced to nil.

Go back to CH, or crawl back under your stone, whatever.

>>The Grand Douche

I don't believe anyone in the world is truly fond of you.

People like you can only tolerate sycophants.

>>26
You know what's funny?

For someone with deep hatred of myself and a constant gnawing fear of everyone else, I seem to not be constantly at odds with the world around me, here and most everywhere else...

Imagine that...

>>25
"paying some daft slapper $500PCM for her to taunt you over her boyfriends' video game collection"

Do you really means he pays a whore with a boyfriend to taunt him over the internet? Why doesn't he just buy a real whore?

This doesn't surprise me- he's got masochist written all over him. A nasty cunt and sick and twisted.

One assumes Gollum is a role model?

>>31
It's not so funny.

Any genuinely insightful writer on the nature of social existence will have at least some sympathy for the idea that society is a sort of dovetailing of deformations and disabilities.

"Getting on" with people doesn't mean you're mentally and morally healthy and intact.

It just means that the wounds and deformations that have been inflicted on you - which are very likely to include the inculcation of a deep hatred of yourself and a deep fear and mistrust of those around you - "dovetail" well with the similar wounds and deformations that have been inflicted on everyone (or almost everyone) else.

The human being who has somehow escaped these deep, primal "wounds" that are inflicted as part of the process of socialization in early childhood is precisely the one who tends to be "wounded" most - who has to put up with the most "pricks and kicks" - in later life.

So there.

>>33

So people who feel easy in social situations, and readily make friends have only acquired these skills through savagery and aggression to each other? No. It is not the case.

Now I know why Alex hates chimpanzees and rants about them so much -they're SOCIAL animals, who have something granted by nature that he will never have, much less understand, even with all his learning.

So there. :p

>>32
I'll leave you to your silly, third-hand, quarter-understood gossip and nonsense. ("Ooooooh yes, and you know what I heard from someone....Ooooh dooo tell...Well, what I heard was...Ooooh get AWAY.....Ooooh he LOOKS the type.")

I feel much the same when I read this sort of shit as you guys would feel if you came across some webpage somewhere telling about how someone had heard there was a girl called Olivia from Cambridge, Massachussets who got the name Cracky because she did cam-shows on 4chan to pay for her crack habit and they say she hasn't been seen on the Internet for ages because she's serving a long-term prison sentence blah blah well that's what I heard anyway blah blah....

You don't know the first thing about anything you're talking about, and would refuse to learn anything about it if you had the chance - but you WILL bleat on endlessly with your silly amateur-psychologist "theories" and "I told you so"s.

You're the lowest form of idiot. Please shut up.

>>35

You are correct. There is no need to listen to hearsay and rumour.

So I'm off to find that thread where Alex tells us all about it. BRB.

You see ?!

THIS is what happens if you engage him directly ...

>>36
Sure. Why don't you copy and paste the thread where I tell people RavRav was kidnapped by the Symbionese Liberaton Army while you're at it?

Or the one where I say she was the subject of the 2009 German entry to the Venice Biennale?

Better still, go back and read what I said about DEVELOPING A SENSE OF IRONY AND HUMOUR and get this ridiculous idea out of your head that you're going to be able to "own" someone on the Internet by totally misunderstanding the meaning and spirit of something they wrote.

You know nothing about what has gone on, is going on, or will go on between me and this girl. Nor do you want to.

So shut up and go back to your silly repetitive Cracky-adulation.

>The only form of abuse from MEN that I get off on is when they have sex with RavRav and taunt me about it. (RavRav's ex-boyfriend's large collection of computer games was largely funded by Paypal payments made for just this service in the course of 2009 and 2010).

The sum of $500PCM is, I believe, mentioned on CH. But I can't be arsed looking, sifting through all that tl;dr stuff was enough for me.

>>37
Yeah. He shows you up as a fucking idiot.

So there's a lesson for us all.

>>35
What I see is you bleating endlessly, fueling this endless flamewar that is being imposed upon you on this website which by all rights should be dedicated to your inspiring love story with Rav-Rav.

Just fuck off

>>39
Yes. And I really BELIEVE that there is a 300-square-foot blown-up photograph of Camel's cunt on the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin.

And that it was considered inadvisable to publish naked photographs of me on the Internet while Loli-Chan was using it because there was a real danger that she would feel impelled to fly to Europe and rape me.

Etc. etc. etc.

You poor, sad, pathetically literal little man. It's such a tragic fate to go through life so utterly lacking in imagination that you can't even get your mind around the IDEA that there might be such a thing as "creative writing".

>>>"The only form of abuse from MEN that I get off on is when they have sex with RavRav and taunt me about it."

(RavRav's ex-boyfriend's large collection of computer games was largely funded by Paypal payments made for just this service in the course of 2009 and 2010).

Well well. Straight from the horse's ass. That is the most embarrassing sentence I've ever read in my life.

No wonder he loathes himself.

>>42

I suggest you head to these people, then:

http://www.fanfiction.net/

...and spam their board up, for a change?

We don't want your tl;dr. This an imageboard. A CRACKY imageboard. Now GO.

captcha = Alexisafaggot

the problem is that people like Alex love being insulted ans much as being insulting

all this commotion has one purpose and one purpose only, Alex's amusement, and he's having too much fun to stop

>>10

I lol'd hard at this.

1-) Alex makes a post
2-) Someone attacks it, laughs at it etc. because it's an Alex post
3-) Alex gets buttmad, posts a hundred other posts about how stupid posters on that board are
4-) Huge drama thread(s) with endless discussion of why Alex is hated.
5-) Alex leaves for an indeterminate time, leaving an increased amount of hatred for him in the board's posters.
6-) Alex comes back, makes a post (in a thread not about Alex) that is immediately recognizeable, and for that reason is immediately attacked on, cycle repeats.

As much as there is blam on Alex for step 3 in here, I hate the step 2 person even more. Just ignore Alex's non-Anonymousness for one time ffs.

All this mostly applies to CH though. In case of .71, This post has wisdom: >>18

>>47
That's actually a pretty fair summing-up, for once, without any of the usual infuriating gratuitous "Alex-Reynolds-is-a-pedo" stuff.

I also very much admire the image you've accompanied it with. Any more information on him? (random anonymous kid or actual acquaintance? city of residence? dates on which parents will be on vacation?)

>>47

You're right, of course. Although it is hard to resist the impulse to confront what we find hateful and repulsive, I won't let that old git spoil what's left of my Friday.

>>49
"Lol", if I may be permitted that phrase at my age.

Are you people really so dim and obtuse as to fail to see how a post like this reveals the skulking, sly, reptilean, fundamentally evil nature of its poster?

Someone makes a (very rare and therefore precious) attempt to be fair about this, and includes the unmistakable proposal that maybe it would be a good idea if people stopped throwing seven shades of shit at me, just for being me, for a couple of minutes.

The response of this reptilian little shit-stirrer is fucking priceless.

He opens with "You're right, of course", which would lead anyone to think that he is about to go on and agree with the previous poster's main point that the tedious tireless Alex-baiters are really more hateful and despicable than Alex.

Personally, I find it VERY hard to reconcile this opening sentiment - "You're right, of course" - with the fact that this guy then manages to cram into the remaining twenty or so words of his post the descriptions "hateful, repulsive old git".

Sorry, asshole, but - as I think you're aware yourself and are just hoping no one else will notice - if the poster of 47 was "right, of course", then the people he was right ABOUT and right to condemn as hateful trouble-makers were...none other than YOU YOURSELF.

>>50

Boo hoo! Boo hoo! You have bared my vulnerable soul to it's very psyche, I bow before your awesome perceptive powers regarding human relationships... BWAHAHAHAHA!

Go lick a dogs' ass until it bleeds.

>>47
True, except the Grand Douche is to blame for step 1,3,4,5,6 and not just step 3.
Step 2 might be a new person here, or someone politely trying to explain to nekkid-wordy-internet-guy how being less of a dick might not incite such adverse replies upon which the person in question usually veers off with inane excuses as to how-he-fucked-up-this-time is really just a case everyone else being wrong and "not getting" it and him not being a dick at all.

>>51
Excellently argued.

The counter-points you make are, of course, all immensely compelling in their germaneness to the points at issue.

I really can't imagine how, after this, I will ever again feel myself justified in suggesting that the users of this board are just ignorant shit-throwing little morons who are never on any occasion capable of actually backing up the shit they throw.

>>53

Piss off Alex. Rav Ravs' boyfriend wants a new PS3 so run along and buy him one before he renders your anal integrity null and void.

>>52
Goodness gracious me. Yet more irrefutable brilliance and precision of argument. I really am being shown up for the fool I am this evening, aren't I?

Let's just examine the precise mechanisms of the rigour and brilliance on display here for a moment, shall we?

First the startling revelation that

the Grand Douche is to blame for step 1,3,4,5,6 and not just step 3

Hmmm....well, maybe not SO brilliant, since that was actually exactly what the poster had said himself in his own post.

Oh but wait! Our genius seems to decide in the next line that he wants to put the blame on Alex for step 2 as well! (Can't think why the genius didn't write "1,2,3,4,5,6 fuck it it's ALL his fault" in the previous line, then - but oh well, geniuses are notoriously forgetful).

Now let's see how his keen analytical mind manages to pull off the argumentational tour de force of proving that Alex is HIMSELF to blame for people attacking him for no other reason than that he's Alex.

The person who attacks the Alex post is someone "politely" trying to explain that Alex is "a dick" and that this is why he is going to get "adverse" replies.

Hmmmm....well, actually that's ALSO something of a puzzler, isn't it? Personally, I'm having just a TEENTSY bit of difficulty getting my head around the idea of someone's "politely" calling someone "a dick". I'm also having difficulty seeing exactly what is concretely CONTAINED in the statement "you're a dick" other than "You're Alex. We hate you."

Oh but what am I thinking? The very fact that I DON'T understand WHAT the fuck this guy thinks he's going on about here PROVES that he IS in fact a GENIUS, and SO SO INCONTROVERTIBLY RIGHT.

My goodness, my goodness, now you can be SURE that you'll never hear ME suggesting again that the users of this board are ignorant shit-throwing morons.

>>48 It's Varg Vikernes as a child.

>>54
Wow! A hat trick!

A THIRD tightly and consistently argued systematic refutation of the points I've made!

OK, OK, there's just NO WAY I'M ever going to recover from THIS now.

The idea that you are all A BUNCH OF FUCKING STUPID LITTLE MORONS WHO WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO EVEN COME CLOSE TO ARGUING A POINT SYSTEMATICALLY IF YOUR LIVES DEPENDED ON IT has now been consigned once and for all to the domain of things that CANNOT POSSIBLY BE SAID ABOUT THIS BOARD.

>>55

Leave this place. There's nothing for you here. Go troll the followers of that Bosnian politico-babbler for a change, I'm sure they'd enjoy some choice verbosity from The Grand Douche.

>>56
So that would still be Christian Vikernes, right ?

2 out of a population of maybe a dozen. Anyone else know about Burzum here ? Then we can call it a genuine correlation.

>>58
He's actually Slovenian. And if Bosnia, or those forces in it aligned with the political interests of Belgrade, was the hardest section of that part of the world to dislodge from the artificial Titoist construct "Yugoslavia", Slovenia was by far the easiest. The civil war there lasted about an hour and a half. They started at 9 am and by 11 the whole population was off eating prosciuto in Udine on the Italian side of the former Iron Curtain.

This is Cracky-relevant because the Jews were behind communism in the first place.

>>52
>>48

The post I mentioned in Step 1 was referring to an example of a non-hateful, non-bitter Alex post. You know, those ones where he types a wall of text about some obscure movie star or a music band that was relatively popular (or hated) in his day. I ignore those posts most of the time and they get drifted away from the front page soon enough; or would, if one of those souls who can't even stand to see a post by a (in effect) namefag that they hate.

>>60

Go tell his fagboys that, I don't give a shit, old man.

pic related - Rav Ravs' bf.

>>61

(forgot to finish post)...that they hate jump at it with some post that is bound to incite a 50 post long discussion, with Alex repeating the same "you're all vicious bastards" line again and again.

>>61
You SEE!!! I'm NOT hated, I'm NOT, I'm NOT! I'm IGNORED!!!
I knew that, if I waited enough years, all the ignoring that my mother failed to give me would be made up for and I would be ignored, unconditionally ignored, by dozens...well, maybe half-dozens...as I am today on this board.

>>59 Yes, I suppose.

Burzum is famous enough for there to be quite a few Burzum fans in the Crackydom (which has a higher population than that of a dozen btw).

>>63
This guy is pretty fucking hilarious too, come to think of it.
THIS is the best I can do in the way of a "white knight"?
"When this boring, self-involved, tedious, completely superfluous old cunt posts one of his interminable pointless tl;dr's maybe if people didn't attack him he wouldn't go on and on and on and on and on and inflict on everybody that awful rubbish about our all being stupid...."

With friends like this, who needs enemies?

>>66

>"When this boring, self-involved, tedious, completely superfluous old cunt posts one of his interminable pointless tl;dr's maybe if people didn't attack him he wouldn't go on and on and on and on and on and inflict on everybody that awful rubbish about our all being stupid...."

That's exactly what I'm saying. And that's exactly what I dislike about you. I'm not saying you're wrong on all points in the hate-filled posts; I'm just saying they really aren't necessary since nobody either gives a shit about them or they just use it to throw more shit at you. Just stick with the wall of texts about art and whatnot (Which may get a pro-discussion answer, they aren't ignored all the time) without insulting the board's posters and ignore the attacks coming to those posts.

>>67

Please, scary kitty, don't encourage the bad man to stay! It will mean ruin for us all!

LolBurzum.

That's entry grade shit. Even retarded 13 year old emo kids know who Varg is.

I can't believe i once liked all those morons from the second wave of Bowel Movement bands (bar Ulver and Darkthrone as both became much better).

>>69

>That's entry grade shit.

Entry into what ?

>Even retarded 13 year old emo kids know who Varg is.

Apparently

>>70

Entry in to Black Metal and other forms of "extreme" music. Burzum is one of the first places you will end up.

Not saying that it's bad music but people see it as underground when it really isn't.

Okay, I don't want to read that shitload of text especially it's probably almost unrelated to Crackles. So, could some good soul summarize all of that scribble? What was the purpose of that thread?

Pic well... somewhat related. Today while lurkin I came across this photo. First thing I thought was photo of Cracky in the sailor outfit pretending to scream :3

>>68
Nah, it's OK.

The fact that scary kitty has shown enough decency to speak with a modicum of truth and fairness about this business is actually more likely to make me go away quietly than stay.

"It's hard to give a lie to dogs", as Arthur Miller put it.

Cats are another matter.

I'm surprised, moreover, that kitty him/herself didn't point out further that any legitimacy she granted me in her first post was stated to apply only to CH, NOT to .71. I think his/her view is actually that my "art-themed" tl;dr's are out of place here even when I DON'T allow them to lead to flame-wars.

And he/she is right. I don't belong here, and wouldn't be here if there were still any CH to speak of.

But I'll try to control myself and stay away in future. Maybe I'll explore the possibility of that column in The Guardian after all.

Much thanks are owed to kitty for this!

>>72

A bad man called Alex came, he was very rude indeed and got some bad words said to him so Alex ran away (I hope) before the big boys with sticks found him.

Hope that suffices. Nice tits, BTW.

>>73

Hehe, that was rather well played...as usual.

>>74

So just as I thought, another waste of bytes, energy, time and oxygen. Thank you, my good man.

>>73
You made a funny!

First you quote "It's hard to give a lie to dogs"

and then,

"I'll try to [...] stay away in future."

Unintentional, but nevertheless ...

>>77
Unintentional and still unnoticeable to me, I'm afraid.

Is "I'll try to stay away in future" somehow also an echo of "The Crucible"?

The two swaggering, Merovin-type bullies doing their little truth-twisting dance with each other (or possibly the one swaggering Merovin-type bully samefagging with himself) in posts 74 and 76, though, is a pretty much perfect example of what I - and doubtless Miller's John Procter as well -meant by it's being "hard to give a lie to dogs".

A fond farewell, though, to the cats, schizophrenics, and Sex Pistols connoisseurs of the board.

Bye.

>>73

>I'm surprised, moreover, that kitty him/herself didn't point out further that any legitimacy she granted me in her first post was stated to apply only to CH, NOT to .71

I was going to point that out, yes, I forgot.
I'm male by the way.

>>77
Heh.

>>78

I recall Proctor also said:

'The devil may quote scripture to his own ends'

Good luck, Alex.

I still maintain that Alex knows perfectly well any of his recognizable posts will degenerate in a flamewar, for any reason any person care to assign to the degeneration.

This he knows and said he knows many times.

He goes to great length to make his posts recognizable, and this too he said he knows.

There is no .2 without .1, and I've seen him repeat 1 when it went ignored, in another thread sometimes.

I repeat it to make it as clear as I can, Alex knows his post will eventually degenerate in a shitstorm, and furthermore, I maintain he is counting on it.

Dont let this sappy little disengagement fool you, he's done that too, he will be back, to start a shitstorm as he always does because that's what he likes.

The convoluted initiation of getting to .3 through .2 through .1 is simply because he likes to be the victim, the screaming and kicking victim but the victim nonetheless, followed by the grandstand climax of him pulling from underneath, showing everybody who's boss, or in this case, coolly smoking a cig with his partner, who didnt turn out to be a resentful rape victim after all.

I dont care about any denial he may be in or any deception he may think he is pulling on us, I know this for having seen too many repetitions of the endless variations on this theme this ailing, insane and most immoral man has inflicted on us.

He will keep doing this, if not here, elsewhere then.

We can only hope...

>>72
I cant believe I just did this...

I'll never be able to see British Cindy the same way again, and I'll never be able to truthfully say I've never fapped to a girl in Cracky make-up...

O Goddess, forgive my weak MILF loving blasphemous soul...

>>83

'sup .71 ?

>>86

NAOW yore hawt, Cindy...