posted 04-16-2001 05:05 PM            

the first answer isn't always the best.

Lolo

posted 04-16-2001 07:35 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lolo:
psi, I've been communicating/insulting (with) you for months now, mainly on the god thread, and it has come ot my attention that you are not so bright. this does not mean you should feel upset. simply try to become more educated.

the first answer isn't always the best.

Lolo

did you attend college? what did you get on your SAT? be honest.

---

posted 04-16-2001 07:43 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lolo:
psi, I've been communicating/insulting (with) you for months now, mainly on the god thread, and it has come ot my attention that you are not so bright. this does not mean you should feel upset. simply try to become more educated.

the first answer isn't always the best.

Lolo

did you attend college? what did you get on your SAT? be honest.

---

I admit that psichick might be a little unconventional, her thoughts not exactly mainstream, but stupid she is NOT.

Even though I disagree with 95% of what she says and posts, your comments are completely out of line.

posted 04-16-2001 07:48 PM            

just ignore it, it's a lot like a banana slug, just because it's on your stoop doesn't mean you have to talk to it.

posted 04-16-2001 07:50 PM            

ANSWER
Lolo.

QUESTION
What is a judgemental prick.

that's right.. choose again.
--------------------

I usually dont use this type of harsh lang, but Lolo you have crossed the line here. Okay so Psi believes in certain things. Who gives a Shit.

Then you ask her if she went to college. what does that have to do with anything. I meet tons of stupid idiots in college. So does the fact that I took Religious studies in my freshman year make me stupid. Huh.

its obvious you dont feel comfortable with people who are different that yourself. And for someone who went to college, its ashame you wasted your parents money because you should be open minded to the fact that people are different.

and by the way,
asshole............ SAT scores dont judge a persons ability. I think you have been listening to Stern a little bit too much if you believe that shit.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lolo:
psi, I've been communicating/insulting (with) you for months now, mainly on the god thread, and it has come ot my attention that you are not so bright. this does not mean you should feel upset. simply try to become more educated.

the first answer isn't always the best.

Lolo

did you attend college? what did you get on your SAT? be honest.

---

posted 04-16-2001 07:52 PM            

I'm confounded, and not for good reason. PSI, you are extremely intelligent, as well as, a talented writer. Let it slide, baby. There's no room in your life for SHIT like that.

posted 04-16-2001 08:01 PM            

Re: SAT scores. A very close friend of mine had to take her SAT's in order to attend school in the US. She scored rather low and beat herself up over the outcome for many months. Needless to say she got over it, and REMAINS one of the most brilliant writers and composers that I have ever had the privilege of knowing. SAT scores mean shit, as do any other tests which base a person's level of intellect on multiple choice shit. I get nervous when I write tests, so much so that I have failed one or two in my day. DOES THIS MEAN THAT I'M STUPID, or less of a person because I didn't score perfect on one test? NO. ALSO, since when does having an opinion that happens to differ from someone else's make a person any less knowledgeable? One word - GALILEO!

I can't believe I'm even wasting my time defending PSI and her intellect- We all know the genius that she suffers from.

I'm disgusted.

posted 04-17-2001 09:55 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by psichick:
Lolo - how would you react if you were a near genius and someone insulted you this way?

---

I think you're missing the point. I'm trying to educate you, not insult you.

posted 04-17-2001 09:58 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mongoose of War:
I admit that psichick might be a little unconventional, her thoughts not exactly mainstream, but stupid she is NOT.

Even though I disagree with 95% of what she says and posts, your comments are completely out of line.

And if you believe the SATs are a good measure of intelligence, then you're a bigger dolt than you could possibly accuse psi of being.

---

mmm hmm, so you disagree with 95% of what she says, you don't believe in SAT scores, and I'm a dolt?

posted 04-17-2001 10:02 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetee:
Lolo,
it seems as if you are trying to make a point. ALex, may i have clue less Fucks for 1000 please. Ooh Double Jeopardy.

ANSWER
Lolo.

QUESTION
What is a judgemental prick.

that's right.. choose again.

---

ohhh, quetee, you're about as clever as psichick, no wonder you've rushed to help.

I believe the topic was PSICHICK , let's talk, not EVERYONE WITH AN ALMOST NON-EXISTENT IQ, let's talk... but hey, it's all about perception man!

by the wayside, I'm not trying to be an asshole. I'm trying to talk to psi.

posted 04-17-2001 10:05 AM            

has it occured to you that I am merely trying to understand psichick? has it?

posted 04-17-2001 10:24 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lolo:
I think you're missing the point. I'm trying to educate you, not insult you.

---

Let this thread die, Lolo!

I AM insulted by you and by what you represent. You have demonstrated that you have no heart. You decided to try to be nice to me so that your girlfriend would sleep with you! That should tell you something about yourself and your motives.

There can be no talk between us. BTW, you have shown me on your own "Is There a God?" thread that you don't even know how to use your brain! Go away, little boy. Come back when you grow up! You are too fragile for me to play with right now.

posted 04-17-2001 10:32 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lolo:

ohhh, quetee, you're about as clever as psichick, no wonder you've rushed to help.

I believe the topic was PSICHICK , let's talk, not EVERYONE WITH AN ALMOST NON-EXISTENT IQ, let's talk... but hey, it's all about perception man!

by the wayside, I'm not trying to be an asshole. I'm trying to talk to psi.

Lolo

---

posted 04-17-2001 10:44 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lolo:
psi[...]you are not so bright[...]simply try to become more educated.

the first answer isn't always the best.

Lolo

did you attend college? what did you get on your SAT? be honest.

---

Lolo-

I think YOU are missing the point of EVERYONE ELSE'S defensive posts in psi's favour. While we may all be uneducated turds, all of whom possess "non-existent iq's", the fact remains that your words (please see above quote) were disgustingly nasty, and seemed to serve no purpose other than attacking psi.

Just as you are trying to "understand" psi (the thought of which did cross my mind before you're additional posts slammed it out of the running), we are only trying to "understand" you, and how you could write such callous things then claim NOT to be acting like an asshole.

Help us to "understand".

-e

posted 04-17-2001 10:48 AM            

1. No intelligence.
2. What may be disguised as intelligence is really animosity.
3. No class.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lolo:
psi, I've been communicating/insulting (with) you for months now, mainly on the god thread, and it has come ot my attention that you are not so bright. this does not mean you should feel upset. simply try to become more educated.

the first answer isn't always the best.

Lolo

did you attend college? what did you get on your SAT? be honest.

---

posted 04-17-2001 12:09 PM            

Rather than respond to psichick's last idiotic response on the god thread I let it go in favor of trying to be honest with her and ascertain the exact cause of her ignorance. Ignorance certainly should be a problem YOU would agree can be rectified, not dismissed as "intelligence unfavorably measured" or "misguided/misinterpreted animosity".

rather than be honest about the eggregious unintelligence Psi has displayed you've chosen to establish a "Lolo's mean" click.

I'm trying to discover the depth Psi's formal education, not insult her for selfish pleasure.

furthermore, jumping on the "SATs are bullshit, who needs an IQ, let's pretend we're all special" bandwagon is pathetic. let's not digress into another discussion of "what merit is." and who bestows and how merit is bestowed, this is about Psi and me.

if any of you have ever read some of the statements Psi has written and addressed them without bias, the bias of friedship-esque concern, you'd recognize the problem.

I've admitted that I can be an asshole when confronted with startling ignorance and apathy to appropriate education, if you have a problem with this, so be it.

make use of books,
Lolo

posted 04-17-2001 12:13 PM            

if not, don't act like children.

posted 04-17-2001 12:32 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lolo:

make use of books,
Lolo

---

Don't EVER imply that any of the people who have posted on this thread, questioning the validity of your attack on psi's intellectual prowess, need to LEARN how to make use of books. Had YOU spent a little more time reading up on "how to participate in calm and productive debate", instead of brushing up on how to best calumniate others, you would have learned that normal people of high moral character don't attack the person whose opinion happens to differ from your own- You attack their argument.

It's disturbing to "watch" you struggle to defend what you've done, considering that YOU must know you are fully deserving of the asshole wrap that it ultimately bestowed upon you. Are YOU that uneducated, that you can't see that your words were cruel and uncalled for?

Jesus Christ, it's like trying to reason with a fucking hamburger bun...

posted 04-17-2001 12:37 PM            

What I'm trying to discover is WHY Psi is so geatly uninformed.

can we not stick to the real issue?

posted 04-17-2001 12:37 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by CDNFilm:

Don't EVER imply that any of the people who have posted on this thread, questioning the validity of your attack on psi's intellectual prowess, need to LEARN how to make use of books. Had YOU spent a little more time reading up on "how to participate in calm and productive debate", instead of brushing up on how to best calumniate others, you would have learned that normal people of high moral character don't attack the person whose opinion happens to differ from your own- You attack their argument.

It's disturbing to "watch" you struggle to defend what you've done, considering that YOU must know you are fully deserving of the asshole wrap that it ultimately bestowed upon you. Are YOU that uneducated, that you can't see that your words were cruel and uncalled for?

Jesus Christ, it's like trying to reason with a fucking hamburger bun...

-e

---

At least hamburger buns provide a service...

posted 04-17-2001 12:47 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by CDNFilm:

Don't EVER imply that any of the people who have posted on this thread, questioning the validity of your attack on psi's intellectual prowess, need to LEARN how to make use of books.

---

why? why shouldn't I imply they make use of books? I did, so I didn't IMPLY anything, I suggested they make use of books.

quote:

---

Had YOU spent a little more time reading up on "how to participate in calm and productive debate", instead of brushing up on how to best calumniate others, you would have learned that normal people of high moral character don't attack the person whose opinion happens to differ from your own- You attack their argument.

---

calumniate? you opened a thesaurus for that one, eh?

I've attacked Psi's argument from dusk til dawn which is why I'm trying to discover the root of the problem; her education or lack thereof.

quote:

---

It's disturbing to "watch" you struggle to defend what you've done, considering that YOU must know you are fully deserving of the asshole wrap that it ultimately bestowed upon you. Are YOU that uneducated, that you can't see that your words were cruel and uncalled for?

---

"watch"? were the quotation marks necessary?

quote:

---

Jesus Christ, it's like trying to reason with a fucking hamburger bun...

-e

---

Uh oh! the lord's name in vain, you may have pissed Psi off!

posted 04-17-2001 12:48 PM            

Hey Lolo, you said click, I think you meant clique.

Anyway, try this little exercise.

Get someone who is still speaking to you to read your first post to you, as though it were directed to you, not psi.

Perhaps then you will realize how offensive you really were.

posted 04-17-2001 12:54 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by backgroundgrrl:
This thread is so funny.

Hey Lolo, you said click, I think you meant clique.

---

Thank you, I forget those nuances of the language sometimes.

On time, I forgot how to spell segue and couldn't find a dictionary anywhere. It was infuriating.

quote:

---

Anyway, try this little exercise.

Get someone who is still speaking to you to read your first post to you, as though it were directed to you, not psi.

Perhaps then you will realize how offensive you really were.

But I doubt it, I think you're just a big liar playing the "nobody really understands me" game.

---

no, not playing the "nobody understands me" game. not playing any game. sincerely trying to discover the root of Psi's problem.

yes, I was insulting. I certainly could have been less harsh, however, I decided I needn't sugar coat a shit-pill. though tough to swallow, consumption is necessary.

posted 04-17-2001 01:28 PM            

Fuck off and deal with your own inadequacies Lolo, instead of insisting on "helping" diagnose percieved inadequacies in others.

posted 04-17-2001 01:31 PM            

Second- Please refrain from critisizing the way in which I choose to write. If you'll take a look back at your previous posts (and I'm not even including those that aren't included in this thread), there is much there that could be attacked. I'll write in a way that pleases me, and if that way some how irks you - Let it go. I don't need writing lessons from you.

And, third- I may have pissed psi off with my use of the Lord's name, but I'm sure that she won't attack my level of intelligence in order to gratify herself, making her educated in a way that you will never know.

-e

P.S.: How many shit-pills do you think you might have to ingest before your ignorance concerning this topic, subsides? A rough number would be greatly appreciated.

posted 04-17-2001 01:42 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by julie:
Lolo, all of us have read the things that psichick has written, but I don't think any of us get in such a tizzy over it as you do. I can only go by what has been written on this thread, so you are right I should not have called this an attention getting thread but it is. You are asking her to "talk" about her education and S.A.T's so you can understand her better is that it? So why wouldn't you just ask that in a more respectful manner? I understand it is probably because of the history between you two.
But really S.A.T's are a standardized test to predict (weakly) the course grades for the next academic year of a mulityear program. It really does nothing more then that. So to bring that up, is really irrelevant. It in no way measures the potential for learning or determines a persons intelligence.

---

this isn't about SATs. those, as you suggested, may be unimportant but they could, if divulged, reveal some aspect of Psi's character, i.e. her intelligence as calculated by a standardized test.

respectfully,
Lolo

posted 04-17-2001 01:48 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mongoose of War:
Only an arrogant jackass like yourself would assert that psichick has a "problem."

---

she does have a problem. perhaps what you believe to be arrogance is actually concern. perhaps you're a jackass for involving yourself in a discussion which doesn't concern you.

quote:

---

Fuck off and deal with your own inadequacies Lolo, instead of insisting on "helping" diagnose percieved inadequacies in others.

[This message has been edited by Mongoose of War (edited 04-17-2001).]

---

How about this? How about you fuck off and deal with topics concerning you instead of insisting on "helping" diagnose percieved inadequacies in others. perhaps doing the aforementioned would serve to limit the amount of enemies one creates on an otherwise peaceful forum.

posted 04-17-2001 01:57 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by CDNFilm:
First- A thesaurus? I'm not sure I know what you're talking about... If it is a book of some sort, having never made use of one, I can't say that I did crack one open, spin around in seven circles, and ultimately end up pointing at the word calumniate. I'm not even sure it IS a word, to tell you the truth...

---

I can't say I appreciate your attempt at sarcasm.

quote:

---

Second- Please refrain from critisizing the way in which I choose to write. If you'll take a look back at your previous posts (and I'm not even including those that aren't included in this thread), there is much there that could be attacked. I'll write in a way that pleases me, and if that way some how irks you - Let it go. I don't need writing lessons from you.

---

interesting. if you took your advice, you wouldn't be here nor would have wasted any energy addressing me. let it go. it doesn't concern you. No, you don't need writing lessons from me, but you will receive them if you continue to address me in such a manner, i.e. unnecessarily inserting calumniate in an otherwise simply constructed sentence. you see, doing so calls attention to the unwarranted use of a word which obviously exceeds the vocabulary, previously demonstrated, by the writer. the insertion ruins the fluidity of the sentence.

quote:

---

And, third- I may have pissed psi off with my use of the Lord's name, but I'm sure that she won't attack my level of intelligence in order to gratify herself, making her educated in a way that you will never know.

-e

---

I didn't insult your intelligence to gratify myself, nor did I Psi for the same reason. so much for that suggestion.

quote:

---

P.S.: How many shit-pills do you think you might have to ingest before your ignorance concerning this topic, subsides? A rough number would be greatly appreciated.

---

4586739

hugs and kisses,
Lolo

posted 04-17-2001 02:08 PM            

Boy, I'd hate to be a dying family member of yours if the way you're addressing psichick is your typical bedside manner.

I would have dented my bedpan on your pretentious little head and strangled you with my IV tube almost instaneously.

And crushed your lil' tiddlies between two of those books that you claim to read.

posted 04-17-2001 03:39 PM            

Don't worry, there's at least one person here who gets the sarcasm in requesting SAT scores from someone. Psichick is all the things you've mentioned and more. If I had as much time as her to spend surfing the net for ridiculous pseudo-scientific claims and sitting in the grocery store check-out line gleaning supposedly factual stories from tabloid magazines, I might be more sympathetic to her campaign.

Anyway, bottom line is the point about psichick's credentials for posting such ridiculous claims. The most she's shown is that she's passionately involved in the "weird". I also mentioned before, and everyone tried to turn the attack on me, the most likely reason for her behavior -- the fact that her parents are deaf, and she is merely overcompensating for their handicaps. It falls in line with the same psychological burden of baby boomers -- "I'm gonna give my kids all the stuff my parents didn't have as kids..." Psichick's explorations into the supposed work of psychic abilities and the woo-woo world of spirituality is her response to a world that has left her parents powerless, in some respect.

Her displays on these boards are nothing more than cries for credibility - pleas for acceptance, and it's all too clear the type of people that fall for this. These people are not backing her because she has valid, reliable things to say -- but because she appeals to the lowest common denominator of credibility.