>>1
She has the most perfect mouth. I could kiss her till the day I die.

>>2
Yes! Yes! I love her!

>>3
Yes! Yes! Look at me!

I have nothing to say and I am saying it!

>>4
Yes! Yes! Yes!

Cracky! Me! Cracky! Me!

Cracky! Cracky! Cracky!

But most of all:

Me! Me! Me! Me! Me! Me!

>>5
I think, Alex, what 1&2 are trying to say is:

Cracky, I want to share my pathos with you, my huge throbbing pathos. I am deep and unfulfilled.

I keep my tokens next to my pathos, in my pants. Why don't you reach down there and help yourself to my tokens ?

Oh yeah, that's it! That's the spiritual fulfillment I'm talking about. You dirty little spiritual fulfiller! Ooooh, I'm gonna so intellectually enlighten you. You like that, don't you ?

But they're just not deep enough, or have the tokens, to express such profound thoughts like you can.

>>6
Actually, moron, just for your information, I have never given RavRav a "token" in my life.

Nor has she ever given me a "private show" on MFC, and very rarely even allows me in her room there at all.

I think your "authoritative, knowledgeable tone" about what goes on between she and I is probably just about as hokey and unfounded in any real knowledge as your authoritative tone about Wagner.

You are proceeding in both cases on ignorant prejudices and on the empty steam of your own arrogance

>>7
More spectacular information about you and this RavRav. What the fuck do I care if you ever gave her tokens and whatnot or whether you send her gold dubloons.

I don't even know what a fucking token represents or what an MFC is!

I just know they're not related to Cracky and that you're here continuously mentioning them (I've actually learned by now what a ravrav is, thanks to your insistent irrelevant harping).

BAD ALEX!
NOT ALEX' BOARD.
BAD ALEX!

>>8
Bad faggot.
Not faggot board.
Bad faggot.

GTFO.

>>9

>Not faggot board.

don't be so hard on yourself there, buddy. it's everyone's board, and that includes you.

>>10

GTFO nigger faggot lover.

>>11
Haha,
your zany pictures and your light-hearted humour are truly an asset to any board.

>>8
Well, I don't know what has happened in the last few posts of this thread.

Just the usual descent into infantile abuse.

But it's the hypocrisy and dishonesty of people like you that annoy me.

My post no 7 was clearly marked as a reply to post no 6.

Whoever posted 6 clearly DOES know what "tokens" are and what "MFC" is, because he mentions "tokens" three times in that post, and clearly knows their function on such sites.

But you - so you say - don't. You're "above all that".

So why the fuck are you replying to 7 as if I had been talking to YOU?

Because it WAS you I was talking to, I would guess - and because you're a fucking liar desperate to "score points" by any sort of deceit.

One minute you know only too well who "this RavRav" is, and claim to be in possession of a whole horde of details about she and I.

And then, when I come back with information that throws you off your baiting stride a little - hoopla! it's time to switch to an entirely different tactic:

Suddenly now you're far too much of a "Cracky purist" to know ANYTHING AT ALL about the very things you were baiting me so knowledgeably about two minutes before.

No wonder you get so many opportuunites to caw "I win! I win!" in these baiting campaigns against me.

I play fair.

You lie through your cowardly hate-oozing teeth.

>>13

You'll be glad to know that your AIDS site is back up... pedo.

>>12

Fuck you too Bob, you and your subliminalcockmunchingpsuedophallus can go to hell.

>>13

"Token" is a normal word; as I said, I have no idea what it represents,i.e. how to use them, what their value is, etc.
I gather (THANKS FOR THAT) that MFC is some sort of unrelated site.

"I think your "authoritative, knowledgeable tone" about what goes on between she and I [..] and claim to be in possession of a whole horde of details about she and I."

... that was a generic mock pornchat conversation tailored to your particular cravings ...
The fact that you even comment on it how it seems to be "off" is unsettling, to say the least.

>One minute you know only too well who "this RavRav" is.

Apart from being the chick you rave about, nothing. But I'm afraid it's not the last I'll hear of her.

> the very things you were baiting me so knowledgeably about two minutes before.

That wasn't baiting. That was puerile vindictiveness in respons to >>5 (and probably >>3 and >>4).

>I play fair.

Okay, you can win X-mas then. No need to continue posting, you've won the prize!

>>13
Also,
"Suddenly now you're far too much of a "Cracky purist" to know ANYTHING AT ALL."

No use hating on me for loving Cracky. Maybe you should try it too.

Time for the VICTORY LAP!!!

http://www.aids.com/

Run along and play, Alex

>>16
You don't really seem to be addressing the essential issue of the entirely dishonest nature of your posts.

I.e. you attack me on something, and then, when I retort on that matter, your next post denies that you have either knowledge or, or interest in, the very matter you attacked me on.

I'm not going to do the "needle in a haystack" thing of getting involved in some argument about which "Anon" in other threads was you and which allegedly weren't.

Let's just restrict ourselves to this thread.

Whoever wrote 6 addresses "Alex" directly and sets up a scenario whereby "Alex" is giving "tokens" to some girl for sexual favours of some sort.

I'm no expert myself on whether "tokens" is a phrase and system used outside MFC or not, but I'd say that, on balance, that little scenario definitely does suggest that you have some pretty clear image in your head of me and some particular cam-whore favourite of mine engaging in this sort of transaction.

And it definitely DOESN'T harmonize very well with your sudden use, in your following post, of phrases like "this RavRav" and "an MFC".

The whole "I don't know any details about your life and I don't want to know" thing is CLEARLY just some (utterly transparent and unconvincing) POSE you adopt to try to give yourself an air of "having the advantage" over me.

I have no doubt at all that you wolf down absolutely ALL information (most of it false, of course) that you can get about me, who I give money to etc. etc. because you are clearly INFINITELY more interested in me than you are in, say, Cracky.

The definitive proof, I think, is in the simple comparison of the number of posts you have made here today about me and the number you've made about Cracky.

How many about me? 10? 20? 30 already?

And about Cracky? Did you make even ONE?

Please...cut the shit.

>>20

You are messing with my 'Cracky' thread so go play with your willy, you smelly old man

>>20
I think it's also becoming pretty obvious now just WHO the person/people are who have flooded this board with 100 Alex-hating posts AGAIN for the sixth or seventh night running.

Yes, "Liahouse" is still lumbering on zombie-like toward the vengeance you MUST have....

>>20

>And it definitely DOESN'T harmonize very well with your sudden use, in your following post, of phrases like "this RavRav" and "an MFC".

That's not "sudden"; it's a direct respons to >>7
"Actually, moron, just for your information, I have never given RavRav a "token" in my life."

and

"Nor has she ever given me a "private show" on MFC"

Once again you bring terms to this board I wouldn't know about otherwise, and frankly, don't care to know about.

>>The whole "I don't know any details about your life and I don't want to know" thing is CLEARLY just some (utterly transparent and unconvincing) POSE you adopt to try to give yourself an air of "having the advantage" over me.

Alternatively, maybe it's "just actually the case". I don't see how that gives any advantage over anyone.

>And about Cracky? Did you make even ONE?

I most certainly did. And then you came along and started talking about things I don't want to hear about.

Why do I know your name ?

>>23
What "Cracky post" do you claim to have made this evening?

It can, at best, have consisted in a years-old photo of Cracky and some such infantile three- or four-word post as "I love you Cracky" or "I want to kiss your mouth".

I just find it VERY odd that you appear to be able to produce thirty-or forty-line posts about ME - whom you are allegedly so utterly indifferent to - when you can barely manage five words about someone you supposedly care about deeply.

Don't get me wrong.

I would certainly PREFER you to be indifferent to me.

I would even be happy to see someome - ANYONE - producing Cracky-content on this board.

The problem is that I DON'T see it.

All the talk of "loving Cracky" on this alleged "Cracky thread" seems nothing but a very thin excuse for "hating Alex".

>>24

>It can, at best, have consisted in a years-old photo of Cracky and some such infantile three- or four-word post as "I love you Cracky" or "I want to kiss your mouth".

And indeed it was!

>I would certainly PREFER you to be indifferent to me.

Well, I'd prefer it if you'd let me be indifferent to you.

>The problem is that I DON'T see it.

That's indeed the missing part, you just don't see it.

I'm here, posting infantile three- or four-word "I love you Cracky" posts. My attention on quiet contemplation about her. And then you come by "HEY EVERYBODY. LOOKATME, I'M ALEX REYNOLDS, GIMME ATTENTION."
So naturally, I divert my attention to you. I'd much rather have made 40 great "I love you, Cracky" posts, during this time. But you, in your own inimical way, wouldn't let me.

If you think my posts puerile, no problem; hell, naybe they are.
But the solution is not writing an epos about something different entirely. The solution is to write an epos about Cracky, and post that.
When you do that you can say, "Your posts are stupid and simple. This is how you do it." And I'd probably agree with you.
But you don't do that, because "The problem is that I DON'T see it."
You just don't see it. Cracky is a stupid and we're all retards for liking it, and the stuff you're currently involved in is much more interesting so you write about that.
I don't care if it's more interesting in general, or your personal feelings on non-0cracky related matters. But still, you keep on bringing it up under flimsy pretense.

>>25
OK, that brings the proportion between words you've devoted to me and words you've devoted to Cracky tonight up to

12,134 : 1

How do you manage, honestly, to be so shameless as to persist in this hypocrisy?

Nobody asked you to launch into some long abusive attack on my post in the thread about the Jap guy tonight (I presume it was you, or am I going to get the old "Anon" run-around again?)

Nobody asked you to just write another thirty lines about how much you resent me.

USE all this fucking energy to write about Cracky, IF you can and WANT to.

But when I see a ratio like the one noted above, don't expect me to take you seriously.

>>26

>12,134 : 1

12,134 : 4

>How do you manage, honestly, to be so shameless as to persist in this hypocrisy?

Learned from the best, apparently.

>Nobody asked you to just write another thirty lines about how much you resent me.

It just comes naturally with you I guess. Besides, I'm the giving sort.

>USE all this fucking energy to write about Cracky, IF you can and WANT to.

Well, 12,134 : 4 is still a hell of a lot better than 12,134 : 0; so really, what are you on about ? You never contributed anything at all.

Anyway, to cut to the chase, there is no problem with your posts and all the blame lies elsewhere.
Now you leave for another two weeks; the cosmic balance is restored; and then we do it again because you just can't help yourself.

Wait what? Did you suggest that it has been Alex posting the ALEX IS A CUNT and so on banner ads? I doubt that, not his style of socking. And yes I do know he socks, despite his indignant protests that he doesn't.

Four-sided four-faced four-day Cracky-chan being huggable, cuddly, heartwarming, and adorable.